THE APOSTLE OF THE RECONCILIATION

message is ever linked with the messenger, and the apostle Paul was inspired to perceive that, in magnifying his

office, he magnified the gospel and the Lord. It was a question that had to be settled once, and at once; hence the

burden of these two chapters - Paul an apostle, not of men, but of God; Paul's gospel, not of men, but by revelation;

Paul's authority, not from Peter, James, or the `somewhats' or `somebodies' at Jerusalem, but from the risen Christ.

Notice how the Structure brings out into severe contrast the two chief actors. Paul's name is associated with a

supreme fight for freedom, and for the truth of the gospel; Peter's name is associated with blame, with dissimulation,

and with a walk contrary to the truth of the gospel. With the champion of the reconciliation Barnabas stands firm,

but with the vacillating minister of the circumcision Barnabas wavers and falls. Titus, a Greek, is brought forward

as Paul's great object lesson. There, in the very citadel and shrine of the circumcision, Titus, the Greek, was not

compelled to be circumcised. Peter on the other hand, by his withdrawal from the table of the Gentiles, by the re-

erection of the barrier broken down by God in Acts 10, by the denial of the reconciliation which was the very life

blood of the apostle's ministry; Peter, at Antioch, the city midway between Jerusalem and Rome, compelled these

Gentiles to Judaize. So completely did the apostle feel the need to break the bondage forged by the Judaizing party

that he departs from his usual courtesy, and almost rudely refers to the twelve apostles and the elders at Jerusalem as

`they who seemed to be somewhat', and `they who seemed to be pillars'. He declares that at the most critical

conference, when the whole subject of his ministry to the Gentiles was discussed, they `added nothing' to him, `only

that he should remember the poor'!

Oh marvellous anti-climax! Listen, ye traducers of the apostle of the reconciliation and grace to the Gentiles,

you who would use great Peter as a weapon to beat Paul! That epoch-making conference at Jerusalem, where Titus

was allowed to remain uncircumcised; where, in spite of all the `somebodies' and `somewhats', one single-hearted

man, by the grace of God, maintained the truth of the gospel in face of all odds, with all their powers, with all their

authority; in spite of false brethren, in spite of all that had been falsely circulated about it; that solemn assembly,

instead of adding or subtracting one iota to or from the apostle's mission or gospel, could find nothing to say, simply

nothing other than remember the poor! That is the measure of the interference that the apostle suffered by that great

and solemn gathering. `Remember the poor'; how does that touch his apostleship? `Remember the poor'; how does

that question his gospel? `Remember the poor'; in what way does this touch his authority? The whole structure so

carefully elaborated crumbles at the touch of truth.

There is, however, a positive result as well as this negative one. Not only could the apostle say that they added

nothing, but he could positively continue, `but contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision

was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter'-`as unto Peter'- Paul's commission placed

on equality with that of Cephas! This was in face of the undeniable witness from above; `for He that wrought

effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me towards the Gentiles; and

when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars', (surely words used by the traducers and turned against

them, as in the case of The Merchant of Venice, `I thank thee Jew for giving me that word'); when these very 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 (Gentiles), and they unto the circumcision'.

Nothing could be more decisive, yet the apostle is led to make one final statement before concluding this

wondrous apology. Peter - yes, even Peter - had to be openly withstood to the face, because of his failure to walk

according to the truth of the gospel which Paul had preached; even Barnabas had gone over. The inference comes

therefore, `O Galatians, take heed to your ways; beware of the little leaven and the yoke of bondage'. We must leave

the remaining chapters of Galatians for a while, in order that we may consider the complete testimony of these

epistles of the reconciliation to the apostleship of Paul.

There is a very marked parallel between the epistle to the Galatians and 2 Corinthians regarding the subject at

issue, namely, the apostleship, gospel, and authority of Paul, and related subjects.

`... the very chiefest (extra

`... seemed to be somewhat' (2:6).

super) apostles' (11:5).