Reader’s Guide: “The Word for Today” Tuesday, July 16, 2013 Read – Galatians 1:11-24 Once again Paul is claiming that the gospel he proclaimed to the Galatians is not something he learned from someone else or was authenticated by someone else – the Jerusalem church and the Apostles there who serve that function for Luke – but the gospel Paul proclaimed came directly from Jesus by personal revelation (Galatians 2:11-12). Paul rejects Luke’s contention that the Apostles and the church in Jerusalem served as a normative control over the Christian mission. We need to remember that at every turn Luke tells us that the Apostles from Jerusalem came and verified what had happened (Acts 8:14-17; Acts 9:26-30, Acts 11:1-18, Acts 11:22-24, Acts 15). Such a claim was unacceptable to Paul! Beginning at verse 13 Paul provides us with a good deal of information about himself. We can be thankful for this information. First of all Paul tells us that he once was a violent persecutor of the church of God. This is exactly what Luke tells us as he introduces Saul/Paul to his readers (Acts 7:58; Acts 8:1, Acts 8:3, Acts 9:1-2). Paul tells us that he was more advanced in Judaism beyond most people and far more zealous for the traditions of his ancestors. This matches exactly with the picture Luke paints of Saul/Paul. Paul goes on to tell of his encounter with Jesus through which God revealed his Son to him. It is a little surprising that Paul never tells exactly how this revelation came about – he does not mention the Damascus Road encounter in any of his letters! He does not describe the encounter. However, we do learn that he was in Damascus when that revelation took place (Galatians 1:17). Once again Luke and Paul have much in common and tell a story that matches. While Paul does not mention the Damascus Road there is no reason to think that Luke is not telling us the truth about Paul’s encounter with Jesus. We have already talked about how Luke’s portrayal is not really a “conversion” experience for Saul/Paul. I think Paul would agree with that. His claim is that God had set him apart before he was born (Galatians 1:15) – Paul was already a Jew, a member of the people of God, and he remained as he was, only now God had revealed Jesus to him and Paul’s understanding of what it means to be a Jew is what changed. Paul never thought of himself as stopping being a Jew and becoming a Christian – he was a Christian Jew. Again Luke and Paul are in exact agreement. At this point things get a little sticky from a historical point of view. Paul tells us that after his encounter with Jesus that he did not go up to Jerusalem to confer with any human being (Galatians 1:17), instead he left Damascus and went to Arabia “at once” and later returned to Damascus (Galatians 1:17). Paul does not tell us what he did in while he was in Arabia – many readers of Paul’s letters suppose that he was using the time to “figure out what had happened to him in his encounter with Jesus” although that is all purely speculation. We just don’t know what happened in Arabia. Luke does not mention anything about a journey by Saul/Paul to Arabia and tells his readers that “immediately” Saul/Paul began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues of Damascus until after “some time” (probably a short time in Luke’s mind) the Jews plot against Saul/Paul he has to flee Damascus and makes his way to Jerusalem (Acts 9:19-25). Paul tells us that he spent “three years” in Arabia before returning to Damascus (Galatians 1:18) and only then he finally makes a journey to Jerusalem. Paul does verify that he was let down in a basket through an opening in the wall as he made his escape from Damascus (2 Corinthians 11:32-33) and is thus in agreement with Luke about his escape (Acts 9:25). At this point things get even stickier. Paul tells us that after these three years had passed he went up to Jerusalem but he only saw two people – Cephas (Peter) with whom he stayed for 15 days and James, the brother of Jesus (Galatians 1:18-19). Luke tells of a visit to Jerusalem where Saul/Paul attempted to join the Apostles but was prevented from doing so until Barnabas finally convinced them that welcoming Saul/Paul would be okay. At that point Luke tells us that Saul/Paul “went in an out among them in Jerusalem” until he was finally escorted out of town and sent to Tarsus for his own safety (Acts 9:26-30). Paul tells us that he did indeed return to the region of Syria and Cilicia (where Tarsus is located) but that he was “still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea” of which Jerusalem was the main church (Galatians 1:21). There is no way to reconcile these two accounts. Actually, it is not really all that important that we be able to do that – our faith is not dependent upon historical accuracy. From a historical point of view it is most likely that Paul is relating exactly what happened historically – Paul even tells us that “In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!” (Galatians 1:20). Was Paul aware of another “version” of the story – a version Luke came across as he was writing the book of Acts? Of course we can only speculate about that. At any rate, from a strictly historical point of view, it is more likely that what Paul tells us in Galatians is what happened. On a theological level, there is also a great difference between Luke and Paul to deal with. Paul insists that he did not go to Jerusalem to receive authentication nor did he need to do that (Galatians 1:16-17). Luke claims that he both needed to and did. Likely, again, we should side with Paul about that. Luke has reasons for painting the Jerusalem church and the Apostles as normative with an authentication function in the early church – he is concerned about unity. But in reality the experience of Paul likely did not unfold neatly into Luke’s portrayal. We will need to let this difference between Luke and Paul stand. There are certainly enough similarities to know that Luke and Paul are talking about the same historical experience. They share much in common. Those differences that exist serve only to remind us that the Bible is a very human book. God chooses to live with the “historical discrepancies” that emerge. All of this is helpful for us as we try to understand just what the “inspiration of scripture” really means. The scripture is inspired because God works powerfully through the “imperfect” work of human hands. God is far more assured and dependable than to depend on “historical inerrancy” in order for his Word to have power! We need not worry about the differences we find – God surely isn’t worried about them!