Paul's Troubles and His Gospel (II)

Paul has to confront these people from Jerusalem. He has to confront Peter. If he doesn't do so his own ministry will be in jeopardy. He hadn't traveled this far on the road to his understanding of the Gospel to be nullified by these Jerusalem pipsqueaks! Thus, he has to attack. And that is precisely what he says he did. He says "before them all" (that is, he is going to make a big public scene out of this--he isn't going to follow Jesus' advice and take a person's sin just to the person him/herself). Paul is going to broadcast this "live" to all who will hear.

"If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?" (2:14).

Let's explore Paul's allegation. He is addressing Peter/Cephas. He says that Peter, who was a Jew, lived "like a Gentile." That is consistent with Peter's early behavior in Antioch. So, Paul wants to know how Peter, who once lived like a Gentile, sharing meals with Gentiles, can now 'draw back' and require these same Gentiles to become Jews--i.e., to take on the signs of Judaism before becoming Christians (separating from others in meals, becoming circumcised)? Paul has said it much more eloquently and viscerally than I have done, but his point should be clear. He is accusing Peter of temporizing, of not being true to the Gospel, of drawing back out of fear of others, of being a moral and religious coward. They apparently hadn't heard Rodney King's appeal: "Can't we all just get along?" No, they really couldn't. Their respective understandings of the Gospel were at stake.

So, what does Paul do, once he has confronted them? Well, his "historical narrative" then ends. We don't know exactly how the Antioch problem was resolved. All we know is that he feels he has to expose the hypocrisy of everyone else---that, too, is vintage Paul--before explaining his understanding of the Gospel. Then, after he does this, he lays out with power and with passion some of the most beautiful language of his letters. It is as if he has dragged himself through some kind of miasmic swamp and then, upon reaching the shore, just bounds along unhindered on the path.

But Paul seemingly is able to do this because he is utterly committed to his understanding of the Gospel. I also, as mentioned above, would not discount Paul's lingering sense that he himself has "sold out" by coming too much under Jerusalem's influence when he met with the Apostles to get their approval several years previously. Nevertheless, in Galatians it is everyone else who is screwing up Paul's life and demonstrating hypocrisy. And so he concludes this passage by setting the record straight.

Paul's "Message" in Gal 2:15-21

Now he is ready for some heavy theologizing. But really it isn't too heavy or difficult, even if Paul is confronted with another contradiction or problem when he begins to explain his Gospel. He will say in 2:15-21 that circumcision and separation of Jew and Gentile in Christ isn't right because he, and others who are in Christ, have "died" to the law. The Jewish law, the very document and spirit flowing from that document which provided identity for the people, is now no longer binding on him. Hear his words:

"For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God" (2:19).

The law, which promised so much and which ordered Jewish life, is now a "dead letter." It will no longer have influence over Paul. It is something that is buried. I have died to it. You either have to choose the law or Christ, according to Paul in this passage. And, he will go with Christ. In fact, since he has been crucified with Christ, it is now Christ that lives in him (2:20). He lives by faith, directed by the living Christ within. Anything else is nullifying the grace of God towards him (2:21). He will not do that.

By so arguing, Paul has probably overplayed his hand. In the white heat of controversy he has to distinguish himself fully from "hypocrites" like the Apostle Peter and others, who are trying to play a "middle" line. He will distinguish himself from these by arguing that he is totally for Christ. What could be seemingly more brilliant and heartwarming than that? He is just totally for Christ. The law is laid aside. Distinctions between Jew and Gentile are left behind. He is totally Christ's. Christ lives in him. That is Paul.

But later on, when he has reached more maturity, Paul will fudge on this. You only have to read Romans 9-11 (one of his last letters) to realize that on the central point of the value of the Jewish law Paul is anything but resolved. It haunts him to his dying day. He hasn't resovled the problem. Or, to put it differently, he resolved it as a young man, and it haunted him as an older man. That is the way life is, isn't it? So many of us have blinding moral clarity in our 20s and 30s (some of us maintain it until the day we die), but most of us, when the gray appears on our heads, see the grays of life a little more easily. Paul did, too. But here he is the true believer. The one who is totally dedicated to Christ. The righteous one. Others be damned. He has the right explanation. Such is the brilliance, and insufferability, of Paul.

2701