Galatian Heresy

8/12/2019 Galatian Heresy

1/6

The Galatian Heresy

in the Plan of GodUnderstanding the Galatian heresy and its place in the plan of God opens the

doors to understanding the relationship of the old and new covenants a major

issue in New Testament theology. It also helps us understand the apostle Peter

himself and the kind of transition the early Jewish church faced, as well as the

situation of the Gentile Christians who were caught in the middle of a controversy

among Jews who claimed to follow Jesus. Finally, in so far as this entire theological

controversy was obviously part of Gods plan, studying the Galatian heresy andthe controversy surrounding it helps us understand how God uses sin and error for

the progress of His kingdom.

Historical and Chronological BackgroundBefore we can tackle the problems that Paul faced in the Galatian churches,

we have to set the historical scene. However, there are controversies here in twoareas. To whom did Paul write the epistle of the Galatians? When did Paul write

the epistle to the Galatians? The two questions are related. The word Galatia

could refer either to a Roman province or to a geographical region, so an epistle

addressed to the churches of Galatia could conceivably refer to churches in the

Northern area which is geographical Galatia. In that case, the churches which

would have been largely composed of people who could have been ethnically

referred to as Gauls from whom the geographical region gets its name. If thesewere the recipients of Pauls letter, it could not have been written until after Pauls

second missionary journey (Acts 16:6 ff.).

This used to be the common understanding of the Galatian churches.

However, another theory has become more popular since the work of Sir William

Ramsey, whose archaeological research in Asia Minor did much to elucidate the

historical backgrounds for Pauls epistles. If Pauls letter is addressed to churches

that he visited on his first missionary journey, recorded in Acts 13-14, they would

be located in the Roman province of Galatia, in the Southern area. As we see from

1


2/6

the story in Acts, the churches would have been clearly a mixture of Jew and

Gentile planted in a social context of Jew-Gentile controversy.

The South Galatian theory not only fits the story of Acts better, since there is

no actual record of churches established in North Galatia and the churches in the

South would naturally have faced problems with Jew-Gentile relationships, but italso harmonizes well the chronology of Galatians and Acts. In addition, the South

Galatian theory suggests that the book of Galatians was written before the great

Jerusalem council of Acts 15, where the question of circumcising Gentiles was

decided by the first ever church council. After Acts 15, it hardly makes sense for

anyone claiming to be from James to assert that Gentiles must be circumcised (Gal.

2:12), since James himself, with Peter, too, participated in the council which

condemned that view.Thus, I assume that the Galatian churches were in cities that Paul visited on

his first missionary journey Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe and

perhaps others. This brings us finally to the matter of chronology. Paul says in

Galatians 1:18 that his first visit to Jerusalem was three years after he was called to

serve Christ. In the book of Acts, this is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Luke did not

mention that Paul meet Peter on this occasion, but the record in Acts fits Pauls

description in Galatians a short visit to Jerusalem of about 15 days, whichresulted in churches throughout Judea praising God (Acts 9:31; Gal. 1:23-24).

Pauls second visit to Jerusalem, he tells us in Galatians 2:1-2 was fourteen

years after his call to the apostleship. He and Barnabus traveled to Jerusalem in

response to a revelation. Acts 11:27-30 records the revelation of a great famine and

the church in Antioch deciding to send Barnabus and Saul to Jerusalem with a gift

to help the churches of Judea. This visit can be dated because Luke tells us in Acts

12:20-23 that it was at this time that Herod suddenly died because of Godsjudgment. The date would be AD 44. Luke records that Barnabus and Saul

returned to Antioch at this time (Acts 12:25). Not long after their return, they were

commissioned to spread the Gospel (Acts 13:1-3).

The chronology of Acts and Galatians, then, is clear. If Paul visited Jerusalem

with Barnabus fourteen years after his conversion at about the time when Herod

died, Paul was converted in AD 30. The first visit to Jerusalem recorded in Acts

9:26-30 would have been in AD 33.

2


3/6

This gives us a skeletal chronology for the first parts of Acts as well.

Everything recorded in Acts 1 through 9:22 occurred in AD 30, the year of Christs

death and resurrection. From Acts 9:22 to the end of Acts 12, Luke reports the

history of the next 11 years of the Churchs growth. Pauls missionary journey in

Acts 13-14 and the Jerusalem council are not precisely dated. Considering the dataas a whole, the council would probably have been in AD 49, give or take a year.

Pauls missionary journey to the churches in Galatia represented a journey of

over 1200 miles. He may have begun late in AD 44 or in AD 45 and presumably

took at least two years. Paul and Barnabus traveled first through the cities

mentioned in Acts 13-14 and then revisited each city, establishing elders for the

churches that had been planted (14:23). If his journey ended sometime in AD 47,

then Paul would have received news shortly after of the churches in Galatianfolding to pressure from Jewish Christians, perhaps claiming to be from James (cf.

Gal. 2:12), who taught that Gentiles must be circumcised to be saved (cf. Acts

15:1-2). The churches in Galatia, Paul said, had turned from his Gospel quickly

(Gal. 1:6) and Paul must have responded immediately. This suggests that Galatians

was written in AD 47 or 48, not long before the Jerusalem council.

Apparently the Judaizers visited the churches in Galatia, disrupting them and

creating a controversy, which Paul answered by his letter. Then, perhaps the sameJudaizers or others of the same opinion came to Antioch to confront Paul and

Barnabus directly. Since these men were from Judea and probably claimed to

represent the apostles, it was decided to send Paul and Barnabus to Jerusalem to

bring the matter to a clear conclusion. Once the council of Jerusalem made its

public declaration, the matter of Gentiles being circumcised could no longer be a

major issue in the churches. After Acts 15, whoever claimed that Gentiles must be

circumcised to be saved could be easily answered with the united voice of theapostles in a public declaration from a council held in the Holy City itself. The

circumcision issue was put to rest by AD 50.

The Transitional EraIn the broadest sense, the entire era from the incarnation of the Son of God to

the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 is a transitional era. The coming of theMessiah into the world already decisively changed history, but incarnation alone

3


4/6

could not have introduced the new covenant era. Jesus had to minister to Israel as

her Messiah, die on the cross for the sins of the world, and rise again from the dead

to ascend and be seated at the right hand of God in order for the kingdom that He

announced to be established and the world to enter the new era.

However, the existence of the temple in Jerusalem meant that there seemed tobe two divinely sanctioned brides of the Creator God. Jesus Himself said that

the temple was His Fathers house and the apostles preached and worshipped

there, even after the Church had been officially established at Pentecost. It was

only when the temple was destroyed by an act of divine judgement, as Jesus

predicted (Mat. 24), that the rejection of old covenant Israel and the establishment

of the new covenant Israel was made publicly manifest.

Within this long transitional era, there are important though smallertransitions as well. On of the most striking is the change of the disciples of Jesus

from their partial unbelief before His death and resurrection to their robust faith

after the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost. In the book of Acts, there is also a transition

from the era when the church is almost exclusively Jewish to a time when the faith

of Christ has spread throughout the Roman empire and is embraced by Gentiles as

well. This transition, however, has not received as much attention as it deserves.

Until Peter is sent by God to visit Cornelius, the Gospel has only beenpreached among Jews and Samaritans. The visit to Cornelius was some time after

Pauls first visit to Jerusalem three years after his conversion, and before Pauls

visit to Jerusalem in AD 44 to bring relief to the churches in Judea. Otherwise, it is

difficult to date with any precision. The significance of the incident in the book of

Acts, however, is profound. The story of Peters visit to Cornelius is the longest

single narrative in the entire book (Acts 10:1-11:18). Not only are there repeated

references to the Centurions and Peters visions in this story (Centurion: 10:3-6,22, 30-32; 11:13-14; Peter: 10:9-16; 11:4-10), Peter also refers back to this incident at

the Jerusalem council in the decisive speech that effectively brought the whole

debate to an end. What happened at this visit brought about an unexpected

change in the history of the early church.

4


5/6

This may surprise a modern reader. After all, when Jesus rose from the dead,

He commanded His followers to disciple the nations (Mat. 28:19). In spite of1

this, however, it was not clear to Peter or the other disciples that they were to

preach the Gospel to Gentiles. After the persecution that occurred after the stoning

of Stephen apparently led by Saul (Acts 8:1) the Jewish Christians werescattered away from Jerusalem. What is remarkable here is that for some reason,

they confined their Gospel preaching to Jews only (Acts 11:19). This same lack of

insight about the universal character of the Gospel is evident in the story of Peters

visit to Cornelius. Without a special divine visitation, it would not have occurred

to Peter that the Great Commission could mean that he could eat with Gentiles and

preach the Gospel to them.

And he said to them, You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a

Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has

shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean. So

when I was sent for, I came without objection. I ask then why you

sent for me. (Acts 10:28-29)

However, even a vision from God sending Peter to the home of a Gentile wasnot enough to enable Peter and his Jewish freinds to grasp the full meaning of the

Great Commission. Peter did, of course, preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, but he

apparently did not imagine that they could be baptized without first having been

circumcised.

5

In my book The Baptism of Jesus the Christ, I pointed out Hal Lindseys remarkable exegesis of1

Matthew 28:19. Lindsey asserted: Go therefore and make disciples of [Greek = out of] all thenations.. . . We are told to make disciples from out of all the Gentiles. You dont disciple nations,you disciple individuals, so the Greek word translated nations should be understood in its mostfrequently used senseGentiles. However, the Greek of Matthew 28:19 does not include theGreek word out of. In fact, Jesus actually commanded exactly what Lindsey said cannot be done.In Greek, the verb here is disciple, which is translated into English as make disciples of sincethe word disciple in English is not a verb. But if we make it a verb to understand clearly what

Jesus said, the command is disciple [verb] the nations [direct object]. There implication here isnot that we are to make some disciples out of every nation but rather that the nations of the world

are to be taught to believe in Christ and be baptized. Jesus is commanding His disciples to conquerthe world through the Gospel. See: The Baptism of Jesus the Christ(Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock,2010), pp. 197-98.


6/6

While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all

who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised

who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy

Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearingthem speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared,

Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have

received the Holy Spirit just as we have? (Acts 10:44-47)In addition to the Great Commission and to special revelation in a vision, it

was necessary for God to pour out the Spirit in an evident display of His

covenantal blessing in order for Peter and those with him to understand thatGentiles were to be received into the body of Christ simply upon the basis of their

professed faith.

If the story of Peters slow realization ended here, it would be remarkable

enough, but there is more. Sometime after the revelation of Gods inclusion of the

Gentiles in Acts 10, Peter visited Antioch and was eating with Gentile Christians

(Gal. 2:11), but when Jewish Christians from James arrived, Peter separated

himself from the Gentiles and ate only with the Jews. Certainly the vision in Acts10 should have made the matter of table-fellowship clear to Peter, but he gave in to

the social pressure of the Jerusalem Christians.

Even more surprising than Peter here, however, is Barnabus. Not only had he

had been fellowshipping with Gentile Christians in Antioch since he was first sent

there by the Jerusalem church (Acts 11:19-22), he had also accompanied Paul on a

missionary journey to the Gentiles during which they would have celebrated the

Lords Supper with uncircumcised Gentile Christians. Paul, therefore, is shockedthat even Barnabus was led astray (Gal. 2:13).

6

Galatian Heresy

Documents

Transcript of Galatian Heresy