Having said that... despite the overall unimportance of the detail of which visit to Jerusalem is described in 'Galatians 2'... figuring out details like this can be of use to us apologetically. In this case, figuring out which visit Paul writes about in Galatians can help us to put a date on when the letter was written, which in turn can give us confidence in how early the things he says were being taught in the Christian church, and go to disproving notions that the message changed over time. So it is with that in mind that I find this debate to have some value.
On to it then... Does Galatians 2 refer to the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 or Paul's visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11?
Galatians 2:1-10
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery— 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. 6 And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
Acts 15: 1-21
But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question. 3 So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the brothers. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. 5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”
6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”
12 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13 After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,
16 “‘After this I will return,
and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen;
I will rebuild its ruins,
and I will restore it,
17 that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who are called by my name,
says the Lord, who makes these things 18 known from of old.’19 Therefore my judgement is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. 21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”
Acts 11:27-30
Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. 28 And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world (this took place in the days of Claudius). 29 So the disciples determined, every one according to his ability, to send relief to the brothers living in Judea. 30 And they did so, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.
Which is it?
Matches:
On first glance, it seems that the obvious connection is between Galatians and The Jerusalem Council. There are a fair few matches that seem to scream that these are the same events:
On first glance, it seems that the obvious connection is between Galatians and The Jerusalem Council. There are a fair few matches that seem to scream that these are the same events:
- Paul and Barnabas travel together from Antioch to Jerusalem
- James and Peter met them
- Some dissenters were present
- Circumcision was a major topic of discussion
- Paul's message was not changed by the apostles in Jerusalem
- The conclusion is that Jewish laws should not be applied to Gentiles
- Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch. (Acts 15:30, Gal 2:11)
- Some time after Paul and Barnabas have a disagreement. (Acts 15:39, Gal 2:13)
- Paul and Barnabas travel together from Antioch to Jerusalem
- Paul makes his journey after a revelation
- In Acts Paul is delivering help for the poor which in Galatians is 'the very thing he was eager to do'.
- This is Paul's second visit recorded in Acts, Galatians also describes Paul's second visit.
- Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch. (Acts 12:25, Gal 2:11)
Seeing that, the issue becomes much less clear cut. It gets worse when we consider things that don't seem to match.
See Galatians 2 vs the Jerusalem Council:
- In Galatians it is described as a private meeting with those who seemed to be the 'influential pillars'. Acts describes a council, or an assembly, where even Pharisees are present.
- No mention of the presence of Titus or John the Apostle.
- Paul travels to Jerusalem due to a debate in Antioch. No revelation is mentioned.
- The dissenters in Galatians are spies sent to cause damage. The dissenters in Acts seem to be genuine believers who are mistaken on the specific topic.
- Acts 15 continues on in verses 22-35 to describe a letter drawn up instructing the Gentiles on what laws to keep. Galatians only has an instruction for Paul to remember the poor.
- The letter in Acts 15 is a clear list that had been agreed on by the Council. In Galatians Paul says "they added nothing to me".
- Galatians does not use the letter as extra proof that he is in line with the apostles.
- Galatians does not mention the famine or the collected money explicitly.
- Acts does not detail what happened at the meeting when Paul arrived in Jerusalem. It can be assumed he met Peter and other apostles, as the next chapter of Acts is the execution of James the Great and Peter's escape from prison in Jerusalem.
- No mention of the presence of Titus or John the Apostle.
And some notable differences between Acts 11 and 15 which could have been helpful clues if they had been mentioned in Galatians:
- The James who is present is not given the clarifying name of either 'the Great' or 'the Just/brother of Jesus', or even 'the Less'. James the Great would only have been able to attend Acts 11. It is unlikely to have been James the Less as he was not a leader in the same way as the other two, so James the Just would be the only one available for Acts 15.
- When Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch, in 11 they take John Mark. In 15 they take Judas Barsabbas and Silas.
- In both, prophets come from Antioch to Jerusalem. However in 11, Agabus is helpful, while in 15, the prophets are false teachers.
Some of these concerns are simple to deal with:
Jerusalem Council:
- Although Titus and John are not mentioned in Acts 15, it does say that Paul traveled with 'some of the others' and of course the assembly at Jerusalem may have had a number of high profile names that there was no need to list. So that rules this out as a problematic issue.
- The fact that a revelation is not mentioned does not mean it did not happen. Some of these details that are left out are done so simply because they don't add anything significantly important.
- Paul was in agreement with the letter he took, so he can safely say that the apostles did not correct him on anything.
- The disagreement between Barnabas and Paul doesn't amount to much. In Acts, the dispute is due to Paul not wishing to travel with Mark - Barnabas' cousin. In Galatians, the dispute is about eating with Gentiles. This probably can not be counted as a match to identify the events with one another.
- The fact that the famine, collection, or even details of the meeting are not mentioned in the respective texts is again an example of things that did not need to be mentioned.
- Galatians does not explicitly mention the famine, but the collection is implied.
- The meeting is not described in detail in Acts, but on the whole it was not a notable event for that book to cover in its limited space. Paul simply met the apostles, was greeted and welcomed, they all agreed on everything, and he went home. Luke was wise to save the parchment to cover the Jerusalem Council which dealt with similar topics and had global relevance.
Any more clues?:
It might seem at this stage that opting to match Galatians 2 to Acts 11 is a good bet, however the evidence might not be conclusive so far. It could be that the private talk in Galatians evolved into the public debate in Acts 15. If that is the case, then we are again stuck as to which to pick.
There are more clues that can help swing the decision though.
Previously noted was that the James at the meetings was not specified. It could have been any of the three: Great, Less, Just. However 'Galatians 1:9' specified James the Lord's brother i.e. the Just. It seems reasonable that only a few verses later he would be referring to the same James. This is doubly evidenced by the fact that he lists the names in the order: James, Peter, John. James was given leadership of the church in Jerusalem after James the Great's death and Peter was forced to flee. If Paul was writing about James the Great, he would have most likely paired him with his brother John and had Peter's name first - as the Gospels do.
Identifying the James in Galatians as James the Just does little to help us close in on which event is being described though. As the letter would have been written after either Acts 11 or 15 depending on which it turns out to be, James the Just would have been in that leadership role in both events.
If we could have identified him as James the Great, we would have surely been looking at Acts 11. Unfortunately, no such luck.
In 'Galatians 1:20' Paul is vowing to be telling the truth. This could in context imply that the two visits to Jerusalem are the only two visits he has made since his conversion. If so, that would be evidence for Acts 11, but I am not certain that there would be any dishonesty in missing out an irrelevant visit if it added nothing to his point. In Galatians, Paul's intent is to show that he is worthy to be called an apostle. Simply delivering some collection money, if that is all he did, probably does nothing to help that. Having said that, the context of 'Galatians 1:17' is that he did not speak to the apostles or visit Jerusalem after his conversion, and then he lists the exceptions. On the assumption that he most likely met them when delivering the collection, he probably would have had to count that in this list. Considering he is basing an important argument on how many visits he made to Jerusalem, it would be careless of him to leave one out for any reason. So after all, this vow does seem to point towards Acts 11.
Something we can possibly use to find clues and make our decision is the fact that we have solid evidence for dating both of the visits in Acts 11 and 15.
Acts 11 can be dated to 44AD as it happened about the time (Acts 12:1) of James the Great's martyrdom. Acts 15 can be dated using the Gallio Inscription. We discover that Paul met Gallio in 51AD. A year and a half had passed since he had met Aquila and Priscilla, and given a reasonable amount of time for Paul's travels from Antioch to Corinth and his stay there after the Jerusalem Council, we are brought to 48AD or 49AD.
Galatians gives us two time frames: three years from Paul's conversion in 1:18, and fourteen years in 2:1.
We can count backwards from the possible dates we have for the meeting and see if they make sense.
44AD-14=30AD 30-3=27AD. This obviously puts us too early.
48AD-14=34AD 34-3=31AD. This seems like a reasonable date, given that Jesus' resurrection occurred in 30AD. Or if the Council was in 49AD, we have 35AD and 32AD, which also could be correct.
However, there is a flaw with this counting method. I have used the modern way of counting as opposed to the ancient Hebrew way of counting, which undoubtedly would have been used by the authors of the New Testament. Modern counting begins at nought. Hebrew counting begins on one. So that will alter the calculations.
44AD-14=31AD 31-3=29AD. This is still too early.
48AD-14=35AD 35-3=32AD. This still looks like a good date. Even 36AD and 33AD are reasonable.
There is another problem with this count though. Many scholars believe that the three years are included within the fourteen, so only fourteen need to be counted in total. This is due to the Greek language Paul uses. Both passages in English read as though the years should add up to 17, but it is very possible there is a distinction in the Greek. For three (1:18) Paul uses 'meta' (μετὰ) and for fourteen (2:1) he uses 'dia' (διὰ). So given this condition, the calculation changes again.
44AD-14=31AD
48AD-14=35AD
It now seems that the famine visit once again makes more sense, while the Jerusalem Council falls a bit too late.
Essentially this clue hangs on whether or not the years between Paul's conversion and the visit in Galatians 2 are fourteen or seventeen.
The timeline of events can give another clue though too. After both visits Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch and stay there for some time.
However their next movements might be a clue. After the famine visit, Paul and Barnabas begin their first missionary journey. After the Jerusalem Council, they begin their second.
In the Galatians visit, Paul speaks with the apostles and presents his gospel so that they can correct him on anything that isn't right. They agree with him on everything and then it is decided that he should go and minister to the Gentiles.
Would it make sense for this to have happened after Paul had already spent several years travelling the world and spreading the gospel? If he had been wrong in his preaching, he would have had a lot of damage control to fix. It seems much more reasonable to think that this meeting happened in 44AD before he began his foreign travels. If not, then it would be around 50AD, with over six years of false preaching behind them that he would need to undo.
The event that follows in 'Galatians 2:11-21' is another important clue. This event is not described in Acts, so it doesn't help us there, but the things that happen in it can be tied to things we know. Peter comes to Antioch and Paul corrects him for separating himself from the Gentiles. In Acts 10, Peter had begun eating with Gentiles, but according to 'Galatians 2:12' he felt peer pressure from some men sent by James to stop doing it. It even refers to them as 'the circumcision party' or 'group'.
This makes very little sense after the Jerusalem Council. The Council had decided that circumcision was unnecessary. Both Peter and James had stood up and spoken confidently that they welcomed the Gentiles and that they would officially be recognised as true members of the church. There was even that official letter that settled the matter once and for all.
For Peter and apparently James to become hypocrites so soon afterwards makes no sense. Even Barnabas sides with them which would make even less sense considering his travels before the Council happened. But if we take the famine visit to be what Galatians 2 is about, the hypocrisy seems more reasonable, as it had only been a small private talk. Paul may have been preaching to Gentiles, but Peter and James were mostly keeping to Jerusalem, and the issue was less pressing on them at that point.
It seems to me that the weight of evidence is heavily in favour of Galatians 2 referring to the famine visit of Acts 11.
Points For Famine Visit:
- Paul and Barnabas travel together from Antioch to Jerusalem
- Paul makes his journey after a revelation
- In Acts Paul is delivering help for the poor which in Galatians is 'the very thing he was eager to do'.
- This is Paul's second visit recorded in Acts, Galatians also describes what is certainly Paul's second visit.
- Paul is entrusted with ministry to the Gentiles. He had yet to begin his missionary journeys.
- Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch. (Acts 12:25, Gal 2:11)
- The date seems to match historic evidence and Greek language.
- The Jerusalem Council was a public debate. Galatians 2 was private.
- The dissenters at the Council were Christians. The dissenters in Galatians were Jewish spies.
- Peter, Barnabas, and possibly James' attitudes to Gentiles would have drastically changed in a very short time considering the dispute with Paul in Antioch shortly after. Circumcision and eating with Gentiles should have been a settled matter. Barnabas in particular should have not been swayed considering he had travelled with Paul preaching to and living among Gentiles. It makes more sense that this event happened even before the First Missionary Journey.
- According to '2 Corinthians 8:10', the church in Corinth were the first to offer donations in Greece and Macedonia only a year before the letter was written during Paul's third missionary journey. The Jerusalem Council was just before the second journey, in which he visited those areas, so if Paul was told not to forget the poor at this stage, he waited several years before doing anything about it. This is in contrast to the famine visit, when he brought money there and then.
