As Paul proceeds to describe the period after his conversion, he continues to emphasize his independence from human influence and authority, and especially his independence from Jerusalem. Thus he writes, "I did not consult any man, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was." Instead, he "went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus."

It is often assumed that for about three years (v. 18), he spent much time in isolation in order to think through his new understanding of Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of all that the prophets have spoken about. It is during this time that his theology developed and matured, providing a foundation for the insights and revelations that would find expression in this letters.

This is possible, and he indeed acknowledges a connection between reflection and illumination (2 Timothy 2:7). However, there is no definite evidence to suggest that he spent these three years mainly in isolation and for the purpose of theological reflection. In fact, although it is certain that he continued to increase in his understanding of the faith, it is said that he immediately began to preach the gospel (Acts 9:20). And if anything, we should assume that he went into Arabia at least partly, if not mainly, to spread the gospel as well.

In our context, the main point is that his understanding of the faith and his preaching of the gospel did not begin under the influence and authority of Jerusalem. Rather, right away he started to preach that "Jesus is the Son of God," and "proving that Jesus is the Christ" (Acts 9:20, 22). And he has been consistent in preaching this message to both Jews and Gentiles since his conversion (Galatians 1:16).

When he finally went up to Jerusalem three years after his conversion (v. 18), he already had an established theology and ministry, developed apart from human influence and authority, and apart from Jerusalem and the other apostles. Although he stayed with Peter for fifteen days, it was only "to get acquainted." He was not there to receive credentials from him, or in any way to gain his approval or authorization.

It is hard to imagine that they talked only about the weather during these fifteen days, for doubtless there was much discussion concerning Christ, their revelations, and ministry activities and directions. Peter very likely shared with Paul a number of details about the earthly ministry of Christ that the latter did not know. But no one should be surprised if Paul in turn gave Peter several theological pointers. And he was by no means behind Peter in terms of visions and revelations as well. In any case, there is no need to speculate – the point is that they met as equals.

Besides Peter, Paul says, he saw none of the other apostles, James excepted. This was "the Lord's brother," and not James the son of Zebedee. Although James would become one of the "pillars" (2:9) in Jerusalem, he did not believe before the resurrection of Christ. So whether Paul includes this James as one of the "other apostles," he was not one of the twelve.

This seems to be a highly significant point in his reply against the Judaizers' accusations and misrepresentations, since he deems it appropriate to invoke the name of God to assure his readers of the truth of what he is telling them (v. 20) – that is, that he only met Peter and James, and only for the purpose of getting acquainted. This piece of information very likely contradicts the account promoted by the Judaizers, and strikes at one of the key claims that they made about Paul and his relationship to the Jerusalem church and the twelve apostles.

Verse 21 states that he then "went to Syria and Cilicia." Perhaps this is to eliminate any suspicion that he had met up with other Jerusalem believers elsewhere. So he says that he was "personally unknown to the churches of Judea," only that they had heard a report about his conversion and ministry, and that they praised God because of him.

Posted in Expositions | Permanent Link