Galatians 1:18-24

1:18 "Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and get information from him, and I stayed with him fifteen days." Paul (or Saul as he was known then) went for three years upon the revelation that had been given him before seeking out Peter. In other words, the basis of his preaching was never based on the authority of Peter nor any of the other Apostles or the leaders of the Jerusalem church. This is important because of events that will take place in the next chapter.

In Acts 29 passage that we read last time, the visit to Jerusalem seems to take place right away. (See Acts 9:23-30. Here.) However, here we see that this did not take place until three years later. These were not empty years! Paul continued to minister during this time.

"If this period began at the end of the first calendar year and ended ear4ly in the beginning of the third calendar year, the amount of time could even be less than two full years. The question really is what is the point of reference from which Paul is reckoning this passing of time. From his conversion? From the time of his return to Damascus? In all likelihood it is the former, and so we cannot tell precisely how long Paul spent either in Arabia or in Damascus" (Witherington, 118-9).

Paul had been preaching in Damascus, until people tried to kill him. Acts 9:23-30. We will see below that Paul didn’t meet with all of the apostles and elders at that time. This is also when Paul and Barnabas first become associates.

Cephas is a transliteration of the Hebrew/Aramaic kefa. This is likely the nickname that Peter was given by Jesus. Peter comes from petros, which is the Greek equivalent. Both of these mean, “a rock,” or “a stone.” Peter’s name is, in fact, Shimon, which means, “he has heard” in Hebrew. In Greek, there was no sh sound, so Peter’s name is given as Simon. Since Simon was a popular name, his nickname was also often given. Thus, he is often known as Simon Peter in the Gospels. This pinpointed which Simon was meant. Eventually he became known just as Peter, after the gospel had spread outside of the regions of Judea and Galilee.

“It was important for Paul to get to know the leader of the original apostles, who was also at that time the unchallenged leader of the Jerusalem church” (Bruce, 98).

1:19 "But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother." Notice here that 'apostles' appears with a little 'a'. James was not one of the Twelve, even though he was a very important figure in the Jerusalem Church. In our way of speaking, James was Jesus' half-brother. This speaks against the Roman Catholic tradition that Mary remained a virgin.

Here, James’s name is given as “James the Lord’s brother.” This is because there was more than one James in the New Testament. The name James is the same as Jacob. The name has become James in English via passage through various languages before reaching modern English. Of course, we still have the name Jacob as well. But, as with Shimon, Jacob was a very popular name at the time.

Can you imagine how hard it could be to find someone? “Hey, I’m looking for Simon. Have you seen him?” “Which one? I know thirty Simons.”

In such a case, how would you distinguish between so many people with the same name? Well, you would give additional description. If someone was from a distinct place, then you could give their town as part of their name. For instance, Joseph of Arimathea would distinguish that Joseph from thousands of others in Judea and Galilee. Political affiliation could be used, as in the case of Simon the Zealot. A nickname could be used, as in the case of Simon Peter. The name of a relative could be used, as in James the brother of Jesus and James son of Alphaeus. Or a title could be included, as in Annas the high priest. Another example that we see from Scripture is Matthew the tax collector, where a job distinguishes the man from others of the same name.

Most popular male Jewish names of Judea and Galilee around the time of Jesus:

	Name	Biblical Example(s)
1.	Simon/Simeon	Simon Peter, Simon the Zealot
2.	Joseph/Joses	Joseph of Arimathea, Joseph called Barsabbas
3.	Lazarus/Eleazar	Lazarus from Bethany (brother of Mary and Martha)
4.	Judas/Judah	Judas Iscariat, Judas son of James
5.	John	James and John, John the Baptizer
6.	Jesus/Joshua	Jesus of Nazareth
7.	Ananias/Hananiah	Ananias and Saphira
8.	Jonathan
9.	Matthew/Matthias	Matthew the tax collector
10.	Manaen/Menahem
11.	James/Jacob	James and John, James the brother of Jesus
12.	Annas/Hanan	Annas the high priest
13.	Ishmael
14.	Saul	Saul of Tarsus

(Taken from Table 6 of Bauckham.)
 

Notice that Jesus is sixth in the list, while Joseph is second. There would have been many, many men named Jesus son of Joseph. There was a video put out not long ago about finding the tomb of Jesus. In the tomb, they found an inscription of “Jesus son of Joseph.” Also in the tomb, they found an inscription of “Mary.” Guess what the most popular female name for that time was? Mary. So, finding the three names Jesus, Joseph, and Mary together is not that extraordinary. They had found the tomb of a Jesus, but not of the Jesus. I believe it was a video from National Geographic called "The Lost Tomb of Jesus?". Of course, they made a big deal of it, but they were wrong about the possibility of this being Jesus.

1:20 "I assure you that, before God, I am not lying about what I am writing to you!"

Paul emphasizes that this is the truth, indicating that he had not sat at the apostles’ feet to learn all of these things. But, we may be able to discern some of the things that he heard from Peter and James.

Read 1 Cor 15:1-11. (See here.) This is a very brief account of the gospel. This summary was undoubtedly given to Paul by Peter and James. If you will notice, Cephas and James are the only names specifically mentioned in the passage, which is why we think it comes from Peter and James. This passage contains what is considered to be the earliest recorded Christian creed, preceding the writing of all four Gospels.

Paul did not receive all of his teaching from these two, though. Read 1 Cor. 11:23-26. (See here.) Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians on the proper manner to take communion must have come directly from Jesus. Whether this was during the first revelation on the Damascus road or another is not important.

All of this is to emphasize Paul’s independence from anyone expect Jesus. Why do you think that is? The book doesn’t specifically say, but what if people had been claiming that Paul had gotten all of his learning from the apostles and elders in Jerusalem? What if they were also claiming that Paul had distorted this teaching and that they had the actual truth?

“Hey, you know Paul? Well, he’s all messed up. He can’t even remember what he was told. We just came from James, and we have the real, authoritative teaching!” Paul could easily have been combating some such claim. This is probably why he is so adamant that his teaching does not come from the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, but rather, is from Jesus Himself.

1:21-24 "Afterward I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. But I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They were only hearing, 'The one who once persecuted us is now proclaiming the good news of the faith he once tried to destroy.' So they glorified God because of me."

This kind of goes over the same ground we covered for 1:17. The believers were ecstatic that Paul had become a follower of the way he had previously been trying to destroy. They glorified God who had caused such change in an enemy of the gospel.

All scripture quotations, except if embedded in another quote, are from the NET. This can be found online at http://net.bible.org/

Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982.

Witherngton III, Ben. Grace in Galatia. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998.