God Spot

margin-top: 30px

God Spot
This Christian Resource Blog has been created by a group of friends from around the world. Our purpose is to provide links to useful resources, some commentary on topical or doctrinal issues, a place where anyone can come with questions and a means whereby we can share our faith. And above all, to grow and encourage each other. As Christians, we believe we bear God's image in this world, and seek to glorify God's name in this endeavour. Any Christian who wants to join with us is very welcome!

Monday, November 01, 2004

BSF Correction - Acts 15 Times!?

A friend who is a very good amateur historian suggests the following (disagreeing with the BSF suggestion, I think):

It has been much debated as to whether Gal 2:1-10 refers to Acts 15. The chief difficulties equating the two are:

1) Gal2:1 states this is Paul's second visit to Jerusalem while Acts 15 is clearly at least his third (Act 9:26, 11:29-12:25, 15:2)

2) In Gal2 Paul states this was a private visit "in response to a revelation" (v2) at which he and Barnabas saw only James & Peter and John in Jerusalem. Acts 15 was a very public meeting involving the whole Jerusalem church to which Paul and Barnabas were sent as delegates of the Antioch church.

3) The outcome of the Galatian meeting (agreed spheres of operation - Paul to the Gentiles, J,P,J to the Jews) is rather different from the Acts 15 authoritative letter, formalising the offical decision of the Apostles & the whole Jerusalem church re obligations of Gentiles to the Jewish law.

4) Paul would surely have reminded the Galatians of the Jerusalem Council decision, authoritative and in writing, which he and Silas PERSONALLY COMMUNICATED to them. It would an excellent weapon against the Judaizers.

Recent scholars seem to be progressively coming to the opinion that Galatians was written BEFORE Acts 15 - but not long before - maybe only a year or so. The chronology would be as follows (bounded by two fixed dates):

AD 44 Herod's death (a fixed date)
AD 45 Paul and Barnabas in Antioch (Acts12:25-13:1)
AD 46-47 Paul & Barnabas Missionary Journey to Galatia
AD c48 Paul & Barnabas private visit to Jerusalem (Gal2)
AD c48 Peters visit to Antioch
AD c48 Galatians written from Antioch
AD 49-50 Acts15 Jerusalem Council
AD 51 Paul & Silas & Timothy in Corinth (Acts18:12-17) (a fixed date)

Supporting the above are Paul's words in Gal1:6 "I am astonished that you are SO QUICKLY deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel" which strongly suggest only a short time since Paul had preached to the Galatians - not a number of years!

A scenario for the events might run something like this.

1) Acts14:26-28 Paul & Barnabas return to Antioch after completing their mission in Galatia

2) Word gets back to Jerusalem that Paul & Barnabas had returned from a ground breaking mission in Galatia where they had accepted Gentiles into the church without requiring circumcision or other Jewish rites. There is a reaction by some hardliners who go Antioch and infiltrate the church there (Gal2:4).

3) Paul sees the potential for the whole Gentile mission falling in a heap if the Judaizers have their way. He decides to nip it in the bud by going straight to the top - to the Apostles in Jerusalem, Peter John and James. Either they will support him in which case he will stick to his guns and stand up against the opposition OR if they don't support him ... he will have to rethink the whole basis of his teaching. So he and Barnabas and Titus (a prime example of a Gentile convert) make this PRIVATE visit (Gal2:1-2).

4) Paul & Barnabas get a favourable hearing from PJJ at Jerusalem and their agreement that they (P & B) continue working among the Gentiles (Gal2:6-10).

5) Paul & Barnabas return to Antioch thinking everything was ok after getting this 'official' agreement.

6) Peter then visits Antioch to see for himself how the Gentile church was functioning. He fits in fine ie eats with the Gentile brethren, UNTIL some hardliners arrive from Jerusalem, supposedly with James authorization! These men say, heh! You can't do this and refuse to eat with the Gentile sector. Peter, caught between a rock and a hard place obliges them. Next Barnabas, and then all the Jewish sector withdraw from eating with the Gentiles. Paul says ENOUGH! This was a TOTAL RENEGING OF WHAT HAD BEEN AGREED A SHORT TIME AGO AT JERUSALEM between he & Barnabas and Peter James and John, so he confronts the issue head on (Gal 2:11-14).

7) It would seem that Paul's council prevailed and Peter (and Barnabas and the Jewish sector) pull themselves back into line and an (uneasy) peace descends again at Antioch. Peter leaves Antioch.

8) Paul then gets word that the Galatian church has fallen under the spell of the Judaizers. He is stung into immediate action and WRITES GALATIANS and dispatches it.

9) Some more Judaizers arrive in Antioch (from Judea) and openly challenge the Gentile conversions that are without circumcision. Paul and Barnabas say NO WAY! The debate escalates. The Antioch church decides that this whole issue of Gentile obligation to the Jewish law HAS TO BE RESOLVED ONCE AND FOR ALL - by an OPEN CHURCH decision involving the FULL CHURCH, ELDERS and APOSTLES at Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas are chosen as Antioch's representatives (Acts15:1-2).

10) The Jerusalem council makes its decision, confirmed in writing and addressed to Antioch, Cilicia and Syria. Paul and Barnabas, Judas and Silas return to Antioch with the letter (Acts 15:22-24).

11) After some time (probably months not years) Paul & Barnabas decide they should visit again their Galatian converts. They disagreed about whether John Mark should accompany them resulting in a split into two pairs - Paul & Silas going to Galatia via Syria and Cilicia and Barnabas and John Mark going to Cyprus (Acts 15:36-41).

12) In Galatia Paul and Silas deliver the decisions of the Jerusalem Council. Interestingly there is no hint (in Acts) of earler trouble in Galatia except a possible inference from the rather direct statement that the Jerusalem rulings were to be 'obeyed' (Acts 16:4-5).

13) The writer of Acts (almost certainly Luke) suddenly appears at the end of Acts 16 when the narrative changes to the first person, strongly suggesting that he joined Paul and Silas and Timothy at this point of their journey (Acts16:8-10).

SOME SPECULATIONS RE LUKE AND THE GALATIAN CRISIS

Assuming Luke is the author of Acts. It has been suggested since early church times (ie writings of the 2nd century) that he was from Antioch and some scholars think he is the Lucius of Cyrene in Acts 13:1. But how did he fit into, and what did he know about, the Galatians crisis. In Acts:
A. Why does he not mention Paul & Barnabas' earlier Gal2:1 visit to Jerusalem?
B. Why does he not mention the Galatian crisis (assuming he knew about it)?
C. Why does he suddenly 'pop up' to join Paul's party in Troas (Acts16:10) apparently as an experienced and well known (Gentile?) Christian brother?
D. Could he be expected to have known about the Galatian crisis?

Too much for here, but there's an interesting study on the net, an email list forum for exchange by 'serious' Pauline scholars. Stan, Michele - thoughts on all this?

Gary, I think our friend the historian could be nominate3d to the BSF board - he could do the next re-write of the notes!

# posted by geoff @ 3:03 pm

0 comments

Comments: Post a Comment

<< That's it! But checkout the Archives for more...