Week two: 1.10-24 Paul's account of his qualifications to present truth

Rev. Stanley L. Derickson Ph.D.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the author, except as provided by U.S.A. copyright laws.

If you will remember in the pervious study, we saw that Paul was rather put out at the people for setting aside the gospel plainly given to them, for one that would call them unto and under the law. He is not particularly appreciative of the false teachers either, as he says let them be damned.

In this section he continues on by being rather plain of tongue as he reminds them that this gospel that he had taught was not of his making, but that it was the simple truth from God Himself - not an arrogant statement of who he was, but rather a plain and simple statement that they hadn't forsaken his gospel, but that they had forsaken God's gospel.

10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

A simple statement that if Paul made people happy he then would not be serving Christ. Now, that is a mouth full from the man that should know. This man spent time with Christ, this man spent time walking the earth preaching Christ, and this man served only Christ.

What is the truth he conveys? If you are pleasing the lost, you aren't serving Christ. Another way is to say if you are pleasing the lost you aren't pleasing Christ.

My, how I would shudder if I were one of those pastors that had poled his community to see what they liked in a church and then designed a church to meet the "likes" of his community. They are pleasing the lost, thus one must wonder how they are pleasing Christ.

Ought we not see what Christ says about doing church and pattern our ministry after his thoughts rather than the thoughts of the lost? Do you think? This is not to say that these pastors don't have numerical success, financial success, and at times even seemingly spiritual success, but how successful are you if you please not Christ?

I might make further comment - the term translated "please" relates to make excitement, and another phrase the Lexicon suggests is "to accommodate oneself to the opinions, desires and interests of others" - now if that doesn't describe many today I don't know what would. They mold themselves into whatever they think the lost might respond to so that the lost will feel comfortable in the church.

I think enough is said to make it clear that we ought to please and serve Christ and not our community. Many try to make their worship service palatable for the unbeliever. I suggested to one congregation that was only a few blocks from a large Catholic church and was surrounded by many Catholic families, that if we used this concept we would have to have mass on Sunday mornings - not an option that would please God, so why would having church the way pagans feel comfortable please Him?

Well, maybe just one more observation from this verse before we move on. It is obvious that pleasing men is in stark contrast to being the servant of Christ. The term translated "servant" has a very interesting contrast to be added to our discussion. It means to give up ones interest to another, or devoted to another to the disregard of one's own interest. In relation to Christ, it is placing oneself to naught and doing all for Him. The contrast here is that these pastors are giving up their own interest to the lost, instead of to the Lord.

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

Paul certifies that the gospel he preached was not from man. Certify has the thought of make known the fact. It relates to assuring others of a fact. There is the idea of guarantee as well. When a company certifies something in relation to their product, they are desirous of your trust in what they say. One usually assumes some amount of guarantee with this certification.

Paul uses the term in Eph. 1.9 in his introduction of his letter. He tells the Ephesian believers that God has made His will KNOWN to us - a revelation based on truth. The Greek word does not imply the certification idea, but does have the thought of a complete knowledge, thus certification is implied.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Imagine, if you will, anyone thinking that Paul had heard a gospel from the talk around the fire, accepted it and gone out into the world preaching it. That is what the people would have had to have believed of him to leave his gospel, the one that he declared from Christ Himself, for a gospel that had been substituted by the Judaizers.

He declares that he didn't gain his gospel from the teachings of men, but by the revelation of Christ. The term translated "taught" is the same thought of the gift of teaching - the communication through discourse of information - the emphasis is on the teaching of man to man. This is held in stark contrast to the revelation or revealing of information from God Himself to Paul personally. The term translated “revelation” is "apokalupsis" a related term to the title of the Revelation of John - indeed, the very same word is used in Revelation 1.1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:"

The book of Galatians was probably the first book Paul wrote, so predates the Revelation to John by many years, but we can know that the gospel Paul taught was received from the same Christ that revealed the future to John many years later.

Paul now launches off into his resume, as he lays ground work for his authority to preach the gospel that he preached. He tells them that he is an example of the Grace that he so clearly preached, that he was chief of all sinners and yet God reached down and touched his life in salvation. He continues to illustrate what he has just said, that he was preaching a gospel from Christ Himself, not men.

13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

Conversation has the thought of way of life. It is used of the wife that might win her husband by her conversation. They knew what he was like when he was out arresting Christians and hauling them off to prison. They knew of the hate that he had for believers, for Christ and Christianity.

It is not a misuse of terms when he says "in the Jews' religion" - he seems to contrast a "religion" with his present gospel. He divorces completely the "Jews' religion" from his belief in Christ. This would be a direct dig at the core of the teaching of the Judaizers. They were teaching that you had to mix the Old Testament Jewish concepts with the new teaching of the Messiah.

Note also for the purpose of application - Judaism is a religion in contrast to true Christianity which is a life style and relationship with Christ. We need this distinction in our witness to the world in our day. We aren't sharing the Baptist religion, the evangelical religion or some other "religion" we are sharing the gospel that Paul shared with the Galatian people, the shed blood of Christ on the cross and his resurrection.

You can go to the early part of Acts to see the persecution that he mentions. Acts 7.58 pictures Stephen's clothes being laid at the feet of Saul when Steven was stoned. In 8.1 it states that he consented or agreed with Stephen's death. In 8.3 we read "As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed [them] to prison." Then in 9:1 just before his conversion we read. "And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, 2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem."

14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

He doesn't leave the former life alone - he continues to lay out what kind of a Jew he was - a good one - one that was "exceedingly zealous" of the teachings of the Jewish fathers. He followed the traditions of his sect most zealously and profited in the religion - he prospered in what he was doing, even over and above his equals in the sect.

He was a Pharisee according to Ac 23:6 "But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men [and] brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." and in 26:5 "Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee."

Again we see this strong statement of "the Jews' religion" as if he is driving home a point a second time.

I would be remiss if I did not point out the obvious point here that some make profit in religion. We know that some of the media hucksters do quite well with their efforts, some more than their equals on the air. we also know that many in the liberal isms of Christianity do the same, but we might take a moment to seek application closer to home.

Some preachers today make a killing at the work of the pastorate. I don't say these words lightly. They are taking more home than many big executives. I saw an article on the pay packages of preachers in the evangelical camp and while there were many being abused by their churches in the lack of the support given, there were many that were abusing the Lord's treasury by what they were giving to tickle their itching ears.

Pay package to many seeking a church is the prime information they seek when considering a church. They want to be sure the pay package is sufficient to their desires before going into what the needs of the church might be or the desires of the leadership.

True, finances must be a part of the equation, but when someone finds a friend has gotten a better pay package than he and becomes down in the pockets about it I think there is something askew and it isn't the price of eggs in China.

Yes, I am biased, yes, I have had a unique situation in my life, but I don't think I have ever decided on a ministry because of the finances. I don't even recall considering finances except for one situation where we were going on missionary support - we knew we would have a certain pledged support and if it all came every month we thought we would be able to make ends meet with the Lord's help - based on that assurance of mind we considered all other details having set finances out of our minds.

We have never relied on the giving of the people we ministered to for support, we have always relied on God to supply the needs via work, and the giving of the saints. Usually my full time work was adequate to the need though God certainly supplied extra along the way from His people which made our life much easier.

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace,

The term translated "pleased" is used in Matt 3.17 at the baptism of Christ "And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." This must indicate that God was pleased - well pleased in relation to His Son.

When? When it pleased God. Not before, not after, but when - God has a plan, and it is on schedule no matter what we do, no matter what the world does, no matter what the Devil does - God is on track with His desire and plan for the ages. What a comfort that ought to be when things aren't going well, when we seem out of control, when all the world is against us - we have Him on our side and His plan for us is steady and on course.

Years ago I found a little greeting card with a haggard little man with the whole world on his back, and he is saying to his bedraggled wife "I guess it’s you and me against the world!" At that time it was quite fitting for our life. It continued to say something like "And personally I think we are going to get creamed!"

Those days were long, haggard and lonely, but we knew God was on our side and that all would come to pass in His time.

Note. The time of God being pleased wasn't when Paul was born, not when he was converted, and not when he was in the wilderness with Christ, but while he was yet in his mother’s womb. A note of realization might be in your mind. From the womb Paul was called, but it was after he was mature that he was actually called, it was after he was high up in the Jewish religion that he was actually called, and it was after he was a persecutor of Christians that he was actually called - think of the implications here.

God had His mark on Paul in the womb, but he allowed Paul to go his natural course by himself for many years before marking him with salvation. He allowed sin to run its course in Paul's life so that he would truly and fully understand the grace that he was receiving in salvation.

So it is with many believers - He allows sin to have its reign over them, but ultimately saves them for His own glorious use. I have met many that were saved late in life and all were bent on following God to the best of their ability. Not, that people saved in their childhood or their youth can't be just as dedicated, but many are not.

When a person sees sin running rampant in their life, it is easier to see grace when it is coming down the road and it is easier to be open to yielding your life to the Lord and His plan.

"Separated" has the thought of divide off, one way to translate it is to divide off from others with boundaries. There is not only the thought of separation, but also a thought of isolation from. God had separated this man from the womb - had isolated him for His own purpose.

This was a separation that Paul did not know about, nor sense in any way. This is obvious from his reaction on the road to Damascus when he met the Lord. He didn't act as if he expected any of this apostle stuff - he was out persecuting Christians with a vengeance, why would he think forward to the time that he would be one of them.

He was separated for the purpose of God and when it was time to go to work for God his sin was stopped in its place and he became the servant of God that he had previously been destined to be.

God "called" the apostle to His service in the womb. God not only calls, but he separates his ministers to the ministry that He has planned for them. The passage mentions the purpose of this separation and calling - to reveal His Son to the world.

The person called to the ministry is to reveal Christ through his/her life - not make big bucks, not make a big name, and not make a huge church --- reveal Christ in your life - that is what you are called to do and nothing more. What God does with that revelation in people's lives is His business - it is your business to do it.

This believer must admit that in later life the pulpit filling and interim pastorates had stopped coming his way. There was a long time when great question was in mind. Why have you stopped using me Lord? Then one day a light bulb moment awakened stupid from his stupor. All my life I have said if I had my perfect choice of things to do in life it would be to study and research for others.

The dawn enlightened a foggy mind to the reality that with all this retirement time on the hands of one trained to study and research that it might be that God has changed His methodology and wanted some study and research put down in writing to assist others in their ministries.

A number of books have come forth from this minor redirection. Be open to what God might want to do in your life, maybe you can connect with His best a little quicker than slow one did.

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Preach to the heathen or the gentiles. Preach is a term to show the giving forth of good tidings - the preaching of the good news. He was separated to this ministry, he was called to this ministry and as soon as he knew of this calling, and the good news, he went forth to do as he was directed.

He didn't seek out man for guidance, he sought out God. What a truth for those called today - so many are out there seeking council from man when they should be in their prayer closet holding audience with the Person that can really direct them, for it is only He that knows the direction the person is going.

How outrageous for a man to attempt to direct another man in his coming ministry, when only God Himself knows what He wants the man to do! How out of step with reality is that?

Yes, seek the counsel of godly men, but see to it that it is just counsel, not direction. Seek knowledge of situations and seek knowledge from the wise men that have gone before, but seek your direction from God and only God.

(The term flesh can relate to the meat on your bones, or it can relate to the type of spiritual person that you were before salvation. I think Paul was relating to the meat side of the term since it is related also to blood. Dr. Thomas L. Constable suggests, and quite possibly rightly so, that it relates to more than just flesh and blood, but also to the wider concept of humanity. Paul did not go to mankind would be his thought. He suggests the following references to back up his line of thinking. (Gal. 2:16; Rom. 3:20; 1 Cor. 1:29)

The phrase "reveal his son in me" can also be stated "reveal his son to me" since the preposition can be translated either way. The context is the determining factor. Most translations go with "in." "To" seems to be the better easy reading, though I don't know that it makes a lot of difference. Both are equally Biblical in concept in my mind.

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

Paul did not go to man for direction, and he did not go to the apostles. It would seem from that statement that he realized the apostle’s importance, and possibly even their authority, but did not seek that option of direction but went into Arabia. I suspect that this was a twofold decision. I suspect that he knew this confrontation with Christ was a life altering deal and that if he was going to do this he had better get the best information possible - from the Lord - and I rather think that the Lord was directing him in a very real way - directing him in his everyday steps toward his ministry future.

Now, I am a firm believer in the authority of the local church over missionaries - not that this is the method used today in most of evangelicalism. A missionary should be under the authority of a local church for accountability, wise council and support, but when it comes to direction of ministry, the missionary must come under the authority of the one that called him - God. Yes, seek the help of your church but if the church seems to be running counter to God, be careful to follow God. Local churches have been known to falter in their direction finding for themselves and this often translates to erroneous direction for a missionary.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

Acts 9.26 mentions this visit "And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple."

The Greek suggests the idea of getting to know Peter rather than to just see him. The word is "historeo" and relates to examine, to find out and to know, thus get to know Peter. The Net Bible notes suggest an even stronger usage of the word here and it is well within the meaning - to gain information. This would indicate more than a social, get to know visit and would suggest that he was there to gain some information of some sort.

Acts 22.17 was also a part of the trip to Jerusalem. " And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance; 18 And saw him saying unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me. 19 And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee: 20 And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him. 21 And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles."

Just some historical facts that again picture the fact that he was not seeking out the apostles for the sake of gaining information or direction. It seems he had direction from the Lord. He may have been consulting with Peter about what the Lord had told him, indeed, may have been relaying a message from the Lord, or at least informing Peter of his plans to evangelize.

One might draw application from the disciples standing afar off from this former persecutor of the brethren. One might say that you should be questioning of people, but others in hind sight would suggest that the disciples might have missed great blessing by not talking and welcoming Paul - not that they did not have reason to be standoffish. We should great all comers, and allow time and the Lord to show us whether there is danger or not.

20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

A clear declaration of his honesty as he lays groundwork for the authority of what he had been teaching and what he was going to teach.

Picture this for a moment - standing before God Himself, the One that is truth, the One that lies not, the One that cannot lie, the One against which all knowledge is compared for truth -- what kind of idiot would lie in such a situation :-) and Paul declares that even in that situation he would tell the truth. I would have added, especially in that situation I would not lie.

In a sense he is swearing before God that he speaks the truth.

Oh, that all Christians would have this attitude toward truth. Many today lie at the drop of a hat - they lie as if it was an integrated part of their nature. I have seen believers lie when the truth would have been a better course.

The term "behold" calls a special attention to what he is going to say. He really wants them to get this message and get it as clearly as possible.

Let that phrase ring loudly in your ears the next time you are tempted to lie, tempted to deceive another person, or even God.

21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; 22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: 23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. 24 And they glorified God in me.

He was not recognized by the believers of Judea - since he had evidently not been there. The believers in the churches had heard of his conversion and of his preaching and gave God the glory for the transformation in his life.

My what an encouragement that must have been to the apostle, to know that some of the churches that knew well of his persecution of believers were now accepting of his conversion and his preaching and were giving God the glory for this wonderful change in a not so nice man.

Now, if I understand the sequence of things here we have him several years after conversion visiting Jerusalem and Peter - we see that the apostles don't trust him, yet when he goes out into the world believers have heard of him and glorify God due to what they have heard. Now, one must wonder what the church folk had heard that the apostles hadn't. There must have been a bit of a communication gap between the two geographical areas or the apostles weren't as trusting as the common believer.

APPLICATION:

1. Consider the statement of Paul's where he declared that his gospel was not according to man. Can you imagine someone preaching something of his own rather than the message of God? Consciously deciding that he is not going to teach the truth of Scripture and setting about to assemble his own method of saving their soul.

What arrogance to think your attempts to gain salvation are better than those laid out in the Scripture.

Just imagine for a moment that you decide the Bible is wrong, that you believe there is a God and you want to please him and find salvation. What would you set to paper as worthy to accomplish these goals? How would you begin? What steps might you take? What works might you include?

Take a few moments and consider what you might decide your way of salvation might be.

My, how frustrating that would be to try to set a format toward salvation. An added frustration would be to try to communicate this format to others, to attempt to convince others that what YOU say is TRUTH.

Of course no one is going to sit down and make a list and start preaching it as truth as is implied above, but they are going to gradually grow into believing their interpretation of the Bible is the proper one.

This makes the point very clearly that we need to be a part of a local assembly that is going to be watchful over us. The pastor needs to be watched over as well as the people. Both need the common goal of seeking what the Scriptures say. Not to say that the church has final authority over your interpretation, but that they keep you straight in what you do with it.

Where is that line between my interpretation of the Bible and the churches interpretation of the Bible? We know what has been taught through the centuries, thus if we start to come up counter to that we need to seriously consider where we are going in our use of the Word.

Those that have gone off into cult mode surely gave some indication as to their deviation from truth before they were wholly gone off into error. If they had been part of a church that was watching over the sheep maybe someone would have seen this and could have changed the thinking that caused heresy.

On the other hand when you come to feel you are Biblically counter to the norm, how long do you stay within the norm? It is a difficult road to travel to remove yourself from what has been the norm and go elsewhere to find a comfortable church to fellowship in.

I've run into many on the internet that have gone through this struggle - they are changing from where they once were to another line of thought. These normally were changing in some are of doctrine to another line of thinking such as from Dispensationalism to reform or vice versa. If they are going in a different direction than any norm of the centuries of church history then something needs to be done.

2. The fact that the believers were accepting of Paul's conversion and preaching is good indication of how believers should react to similar situations in the church today. They were accepting of sinners born into the church, rather than standoffish and cliquish.

They not only accepted him but gave God the glory for the change in Paul's life.

3. The fact that he was preaching in three years is of note as well - it doesn't necessarily take seven years of college and seminary to be prepared to preach. Anyone that knows the gospel can go forth preaching it, you don't have to have a degree to do so. Oft times the "clergy" of our churches look down upon those that would preach and teach at a very young spiritual age.

Yes, be careful of what they are preaching/teaching, but if God has called someone in salvation and called them to a ministry, allow them freedom to exercise that call and ministry.

I have said before that often is the time that I have been blessed spiritually by men that were teaching that had no formal education. They had been digging in the Word for years and their pastors saw that the depth of their plowing was more than adequate for teaching. Indeed, I have seen these men fill a pulpit better than some "trained" preachers.

There is a growing elitism in the graduates of our seminaries. They see little use for anyone that has not gone the route that they have gone. They have little use for anyone that attends a school that is not accredited by their pet accrediting association. They often are quite critical of anything but the very "best" - in their eyes of course.

Secular elitism is to be expected, the people are lost and totally self centered, while the religious elite out to know better. They act as the lost in their condemnation of all but "their" track to educated nirvana.

4. When I was in high school a pastor of a little Bible church took an interest in my worthless, hoodish, soul and saw to it that I heard the gospel. I accepted the Lord, but went into the Navy shortly after. The pastor did not explain the Christian life, nor did he disciple me in anyway - not that I would have allowed it most likely, had he asked.

I went off to the Navy for the four year enlistment and lived as if nothing had changed. I had no idea what I should be doing as a believer, so went on with my life of sin. I often wondered why God had allowed all this in my life, why save me and leave me in sin several years before tapping me on the shoulder and saying - I want you!

Reading this passage concerning Paul seems to answer that question. He was allowing me the time I needed to learn those things which would make me open to His will and His direction. Had God called me into the ministry in high school, I shudder to think what would have happened. The shock of my friends several years later when I told them I was going into the ministry was bad enough - I am not sure they could have taken it had I told them in high school. Further, I doubt that I would have answered a call at that point in my life. A call must land on fertile ears, not barren rock.

5. What was Paul doing all this time between his conversion and meeting with Peter? I am sure there may have been direct training from the Lord Himself, but I have to wonder if he wasn't spending a lot of time reading through the Old Testament to glean the Messianic information from it - the prophecies about Messiah and what He would be like, what he would do and the result of His coming.

6. See Acts 9:1-7; 22:6-10; 26:12-16; 1 Cor. 9:1-2; 15:3-11 for the rest of Paul's life as well as the rest of Galatians. Also you might find a study of the call of Jeremiah and its similarities to Paul of interest.

7. In verse nineteen Paul mentions James the Lord's brother. There are three main positions on this. There is the orthodox churches position that it was a son of Joseph and his previous wife, while the Roman church holds that the brothers mentioned in Scripture are children of Mary's sister. Most Protestants feel that these siblings were just that - brothers and sisters of Christ - children of Mary and Joseph.

There is no need for the "perpetual virginity" of Mary - the fact that she had children following Christ does not detract in any way from the Lord's virgin birth.

Mark 6.3 seems to be quite clear on the subject of Christ's family. "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him."

8. The calling and ministering of Paul is not the same as that experience that other believers go through. His calling was to be an apostle, but each and every believer does have a calling and a message that we are to be availing ourselves of. Matt. 28.19-20 is a clear message to preach and disciple the lost. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen."

While we see our call in Matthew, we see further indication of our work in 2 Cor. 5.20 "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." Our message is salvation by faith in the work of Jesus Christ, completed and finished. I Cor. 15.1 ff pictures for us the simple gospel and relates somewhat to this discussion of Paul versus the other apostles.

9. In verse ten there is a little three-letter word that is of interest "For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." The word "yet" is a bold declaration of Paul against his accusers. He is no longer a men-pleaser which he had been in the past as he was persecuting the church, but NOW he is pleasing God. The Judaizers seemingly had accused him of trying to please men but giving a gospel that would be acceptable to those that he was preaching to - this was as far removed from the truth as possible. Paul was a man preaching Christ, for Christ's glory and with no thought to his own gain or popularity.

10. Verse fourteen mentions that Paul was zealous relating to his persecution of the church. Most anyone would admit that he was later zealous of his preaching of the gospel. Zealousness is not a four-letter word. Many today suggest that anyone that is totally committed to his ministry is too zealous. God views zealousness in a positive way when it is related to serving him. There is a study on zeal online at my site if you are interested (http://www.thedericksons.com)

Paul's life should be a challenge to our personal spiritual lives. He was totally lost and about as against the gospel as he could get, but when converted, he became just as committed to the gospel. He committed his entire life to serving God and spreading His message.

11. Not only is Paul's conversion and following lifestyle important as an example to us, it seems to be relating as well to the argument against the Judaizers. This Paul, the man that lived and persecuted FOR the law, was converted and was preaching freedom from the law. What a picture of the difference that salvation brings to lost man. We, in our flesh, attempt to gain favor with God, but in our salvation realize that it is His grace that does the trick not our sweat and efforts.

Additionally, the Judaism of Paul's day was about as "men pleasing" as is possible - they were doing all they did to show off to their peers. A further contrast is that Judaism did not produce righteousness of soul - it could only produce works.

I trust that some of our associations and movements today will learn this lesson. It seems that to be used in these groups you must please the men of the groups. You must agree with them, you must act like them, and you must follow them. If you fail in some of these areas, you will find that you will never pastor a church in their particular group. You will be an outsider until you conform.

This ought not be so. Even among the apostles there was a wide variety of men. Educated, uneducated, finished and unfinished, great speakers and others that are not held forth as great speakers, and yet they got along as a group.

12. The thought that believers in the churches accepted this change in Paul and accepted his preaching is proof of His authority as well. This passage just screams to the authority of Paul and seems to scream about as loud of the falseness of the Judaizers.