I was studying Galatians 2:1-10 today while preparing for a group study tonight. As usual, several tangential thougths began to overpower my brain.
The Scripture is the following (NIV):
1Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. 3Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you. 6As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message. 7On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles,[a] just as Peter had been to the Jews.[b] 8For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
Paul has been led by God to confer with the Jerusalem leaders about his work. He wants to make sure that the church stands in unity over his work with Gentiles, especially the teaching that they do not have to be circumcised. The Jerusalem leaders go along with this. In fact, the only thing they mention in addition to what Paul has said is to remember the poor.
We can look at Paul’s other writings to see what his teachings are regarding the gospel: the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, the reconciliation of all people to God and each other, among other things.
It appears that Paul was not looking for approval for his teaching, but instead acceptance and agreement. Did Paul say some things that the Jerusalem leaders did not agree with? Knowing Paul, being the opinionated guy that he was, he probably got a little upset during the discussion. He may have even sounded a little extremist. But he did not feel rebuked by the leaders, instead he left feeling affirmed.
Which leads me to ask the question, what are our churches responsible for or not responsible for concerning doctrine. If another church is teaching “false doctrine,” how should we respond? Should church leaders legislate a response to divorce/remarriage or deal with each case differently? Do churches need to make “region-wide” stands regarding what is appropriate in worship? Do churches need to make stands and public outcries about the treatment of the poor? What should we “go public” about, because when we do, the whole church is watching.
If we look closely at the Jerusalem church, I think we can learn some things. See the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 for another example. Think about what “authority” the church has to “legislate” or “make stands.” Who has authority and where does authority come from?
