Paul’s movements from his conversion to his first missionary journey are here studied by coordinating Acts, chapters 9, 11, 12 and 13 with Galatians chapter 1.
As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the coming of the Son of Man”, said Jesus to his disciples, in reference to the attitude of man toward spiritual things. And of the days of Noah, scripture tells us that the wickedness of man was great in the earth. And so it is today. Man makes many excuses for his lack of reverence toward the word of God, and many condemn the Bible, without having read or studied it themselves, but take the word of others that it is not the work of inspiration, that it is not truth because it contradicts itself, and there can be no contradiction in truth. This latter phrase I uphold wholeheartedly.
The passages of scripture quoted in our heading are cited by opponents of scripture as contradictory. In fact, I have found they cause some confusion even among members of our own body. They are a good example of the necessity of comparing scripture with scripture to rightly divide the word of truth. Having done so we find there is no contradiction.
Dealing first with Luke’s account in Acts chapters 9, 11, 12 and 13, we see Saul going forth with letters of authority from the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem to the synagogue at Damascus to arrest any of “that way” who might fall into his hands. Nearing Damascus he is stopped by a vision of the risen Christ and instructed to continue to Damascus to receive instructions concerning his work, now for Christ. There he receives the holy spirit and is baptized by Ananias. He stayed in Damascus “certain days and preached straightway”.
I have seen it written that Saul did not preach immediately after his conversion, and Galatians 1. 1 7 quoted to confirm this. Luke’s account, however, leaves no room for doubt, I will deal with the account in Galatians later on. It is important to note that Luke divides Saul’s stay “presumably’. In Damascus into two parts, “Certain days” and “Many days- (verses 19 and 23). It was after many days, that the Jews sought to slay him, and he escaped by the means provided by the disciples, and went to Jerusalem (verses 24-36). Some confuse this visit to Jerusalem, with the one Paul recorded in Galatians 1. 18. But the details of the two accounts are altogether different, and can only record different visits, and which we will see is the case. Saul is taken in hand by Barnabas at Jerusalem and introduced to the apostles there, and was going in and going out with them at Jerusalem (verses 27-28). Again his enemies intervene, and with the aid of the brethren, he escaped to Caesarea and thence to Tarsus ( verses 29-3Q ) .
Going to Tarsus via the Port of Caesarea, he would have gone presumably by ship, as in that way, his enemies would not have the same opportunity of overtaking him, as they would if he went overland.
At this point Luke leaves off following the movements of Saul and turns his attention to Peter. He records Peter’s journey through Lydda, and Joppa, to Caesarea, where he opens the door of salvation to the Gentiles, in the house of Cornelius. It seems evident, that at this time, Luke was with the Apostles in Jerusalem, as he was in touch with any movements directed from that source. Saul at Tarsus, would be out of touch with Luke, and so he followed the movements of Peter, and would know what transpired on that journey to the house of Cornelius, because Peter reported to the apostles on his return to Jerusalem (ActsI. 1-18).
We will see that it is important to note these points regarding the location of Luke, in relation to the matter under consideration. With Saul out of touch for the moment with Luke, it is recorded that conditions now are more peaceful, and the work of spreading the gospel, extending. Extending in numbers, and due to the persecutions instituted by Saul at the time of Stephen’s martyrdom, extending also in area, and distance and the work of the distant ones, was reported back to the apostles at Jerusalem (Acts 11. 19-22). As a result of this, Barnabas, under instructions from Jerusalem, first went to Antioch in Syria, and thence to Tarsus to seek Saul (verse 25). Instructions being given at Jerusalem would enable Luke to record the facts. Saul and Barnabas, first came back to Antioch and stayed one year (verse 26) and then returned together to Jerusalem.
This is the visit to Jerusalem recorded by Paul in Galatians 1. 18. But one might naturally ask, why didn’t Paul record the visit mentioned by Luke in Acts 9. 26? or mention Barnabas in connection with the visit recorded in Galatians one?
Here, certain very important facts must be borne in mind, and the reason can be seen. The record in Galatians was written some eighteen years after the events recorded by Luke in Acts 9 and 11, and the circumstances were very different.
Paul’s authority had been undermined in the Galatian ecclesias and his doctrine largely discredited, by the same class of Jews who had been his enemies, right from the time of his conversion. So it was necessary that Paul re-establish his authority—from whence it came, and at the same time establish the authenticity of his teaching. Therefore, he writes this epistle in the context of his divine authority, and how it affected the ecclesias in Galatia. He kept to that context, and anything which did not concern his divine authority, and doctrine as it had been called in question in the Galatian ecclesias, was not mentioned by him.
Now let us analyse Galatians one, as far as necessary to support Luke’s record in Acts. Paul states in Galatians one, first verse, “Paul—one sent, not from men—not from a man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead”. There, plainly, he stated his divine authority. Paul reproves them for being so easily led from loyalty not only to him, but also to Christ (verse 6), and for allowing false doctrine to creep in (verse 7). How seriously this matter was regarded by Paul, he shows vehemently in verse 8 and repeats in verse 9. That some were troubling the Galatians was quite an understatement. These Hellenists had not only discredited Paul, but had superimposed their tradition-riddled law, upon the freedom of the truth as it is in Christ Jesus, and insisting upon the enactment of the rite of circumcision. The correction of these false teachings is the central theme of the epistle. He lays this charge of troubling, against false brethren who came in with secret intentions, not to follow Christ, but to smash up the ecclesias, to destroy the Gospel of Christ, as preached by Paul, and bring back observance of the law (Galatians 2. 3 and 4). It is necessary we keep this context in mind during the analysis. Regarding his authority, Paul writes “It was the good pleasure of God”, that he should be separated for this work, even from birth (verses 15 and 16). His call was similar to that of Jeremiah the prophet. He stresses the fact that his actions immediately subsequent to his conversion were in obedience to divine instruction.
The word “immediately”, being placed at the beginning instead of the end of the last sentence in verse 16 (Galatians 1), tends to obscure the sense of the sentence. It conveys little sense, to say you immediately do nothing, but to say you do nothing, immediately, leaves the inference that you did something later. This view meets the facts of the case under consideration—he conferred not with flesh and blood immediately, neither did he go down to Jerusalem (immediately) but he did do both after he returned to Damascus from Arabia. It is plainly seen, then, why Luke did not record Paul’s visit to Arabia—Paul conferred with no one, so Luke had no means of knowing that he went there, and Paul’s preaching in Damascus first had nothing to do with the context of his epistle to the Galatians, and so it was not mentioned. Luke knew that Paul went to Damascus, that he was away “many days” (Acts 9. 23-25), and it was during that period of many days, that Paul was in Arabia, and then returned to Damascus. After which he visited Jerusalem, as recorded by Luke. It would seem to have been in Arabia that Paul received his full qualification to! be called an apostle–a personal witness—-Paul says, and it is recorded by Luke, who was present on the occasion, that under divine instruction, Ananias had told him—”The God of our fathers bath appointed thee to know his will, and to see the righteous One, and to hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be a witness for him unto all men, of what thou bast seen and heard” (Acts 22. 12-15). Paul confirms this in his first epistle to Corinthians 15. 8-9. Here then is seen the purpose of the visit to Arabia.
Paul then records that “After three years, I went up to Jerusalem, to visit Cephas (Peter) and tarried with him fifteen days, and saw no other apostle save James” (Galatians 1. 18-19). Peter was the flesh and blood referred to, whom he did not confer with “immediately” (verse 16). As it was now nearing the time when he would be starting in his appointed work of preaching Christ to the Gentiles, who would be more appropriate for him to confer with than Peter? who, whilst Paul was in Tarsus, had opened the way of Salvation to the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius, in Caesarea. The three years mentioned by Paul, started on his return to Damascus from Arabia (verse 17-18) and would be taken up in his escape from Damascus, his first visit to Jerusalem as recorded by Luke—his escape to Caesarea and Tarsus from Jerusalem—his stay in Tarsus, and the one year in Antioch mentioned in Acts 11, and finishing in his return to Jerusalem with Barnabas. Why did not Paul mention that Barnabas accompanied him on this second visit? Paul’s meeting Peter was in the context of the Galatian Epistle, for as I have stated, Peter was the flesh and blood conferred with, but Barnabas, taking to Jerusalem the “ministrations” for the disciples there, had nothing to do with the Galatian contention, and so it was not mentioned by Paul.
Paul then states that he went back to regions of Syria (Antioch) and Cilicia, and this in substance agrees with Luke’s account in Acts 12. 25. It is probable that Paul paid a short visit to Tarsus on this occasion (he mentions Cilicia) as it would be his last chance to visit his home town and his people, before starting out on his first missionary journey, accompanied by Barnabas and Mark as recorded by Luke in Acts, chapter 13.
Both these men, Luke and Paul, wrote under the guidance of the Spirit of Truth, and if there is any contradiction apparent, it is only in our own misunderstanding of the facts.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One