 |  |
In his later letters, the Apostle gives practical evidence that he had not forgotten the
material needs of believers who were poor, for he raised a substantial fund among the
Gentile churches for them which he and others took to Jerusalem on the occasion of his
last visit (I Cor. 16: 1-4). In Gal. 2: 10 he asserts "which very thing I was eager to do"
(R.S.V.).
Another very important thing that resulted from this visit to Jerusalem was the
complete acceptance of Paul's apostleship to the Gentiles by the Jewish leaders and
recognition of the fact that there was perfect equality between him and the Twelve. This
was sealed by giving the right hands of fellowship and was a sign of friendship and trust.
What a blow all this must have been to the Judaizers! Not only was Paul's gospel
recognized by the leaders of the mother church at Jerusalem, but his apostleship as well.
Thus, in a wonderful way, the Lord vindicated His servant.
But what did Paul mean by "the gospel of the circumcision"? and "the gospel of the
uncircumcision"? This should not be read as the gospel to the circumcision (Jew) and
uncircumcision (Gentile). At the same time we must recognize that there are not two
different ways in which God saves sinners. This would be foreign to the whole Bible.
The Lord Jesus as sin-bearer on the cross, in His death and resurrection forms the one
all-sufficient basis for the salvation of the sinner, whether Jew or Gentile. In spite of this,
there were differences in the presentation of the Gospel owing to the utter contrasting
backgrounds of the Jew in covenant relationship with God and the pagan Gentile, in all
his darkness and ignorance of God and His Word. One has only to read Eph. 2: 11, 12
to see this:
"Wherefore remember that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh who are called
the uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh made by hands: that
at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and
strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the
world:",
added to which desperate condition they had no written revelation from God to make
Him known to themselves. This was Israel's prerogative, for to them had been
committed the `oracles' (words) of God, i.e. the Old Testament Scriptures. This is why
the Apostle Paul, when confronted with the pagans at Athens, makes no attempt to quote
these Scriptures for they would have meant nothing to them. On the other hand in his
contacts with the Jewish synagogues on his missionary travels he reasoned with them out
of the Scriptures (Acts 17: 1, 2); likewise the Apostle Peter in Acts 3: 19-26. This
context is a good illustration of the "gospel of the circumcision". Peter addresses his
hearers as "ye men of Israel" (Acts iii 12) and bluntly accuses them of murdering the
Lord Jesus Christ (verses 13-15). In spite of the magnitude of this sin, he proclaims to
them (the circumcision) the good news (gospel) of forgiveness. He urges them to repent
(change their attitude of mind) and turn back to God (be converted). The result of this
would be that their sins would be blotted out (19), Christ would return to them, and the
earthly kingdom purpose of God which had been the theme of all the O.T. prophets,
would then be fulfilled and the kingdom restored. He reminded them that they were the
children of Abraham to whom the Lord had made wonderful unconditional and eternal
promises concerning the seed and the land.