44 DEBBIE HUNN Walker is incorrect, it is clear that in 2,1-5 Paul describes a trip to Jerusalem with his partner, Barnabas, and the Gentile, Titus. At the conference, Paul laid his gospel before the apostles and resisted the attendees who would have Gentiles circumcised. This threat to the gospel is Paul’s focus in 2,1-5. In v. 2 he expresses concern for his own churches (the ones for whom he “ran”) because of the potential outcome of the conference. He is not unsure of the gospel — chapter one makes that clear — but he speaks privately to the apostles (toıv ˜ dokoysin, v. 2) because if the Judaizers won them over, the apostles ˜ would tack circumcision onto their gospel message. This doctrine would then infiltrate Paul’s own congregations so that they would no longer stand for the truth of the gospel (2,5). In other words, Paul did not attend this conference by revelation to see that he understood the gospel correctly but to see that the Jerusalem apostles remained faithful to it. And they did (vv. 2.7-9). Ideas from Gal 1,6-12 guide Paul’s pen in 2,1-10. Paul repeats in 2,2.5 the concern he expressed in 1,6 that the Gentiles continue in the gospel. He adds in 2,4-5, as he affirmed in 1,8-9, that he did not tolerate those altering the message. He also alludes to pleasing God rather than people (cf. 1,10) when he says that he went to the conference by revelation (2,2), and the status of the pillar apostles meant nothing to him (2,6). Finally, 1,11-12 will lead Paul to his point : his gospel is not of human origin. Verses 2,7-10 are often understood to give the point of 2,1-10: the pillar apostles accepted Paul as an equal, thus confirming both his gospel and apostolate 50. However, as argued earlier, in v. 6 Paul introduce the first reason and dia de to introduce the second. If he is correct, ù¥ the grammar in this pericope is not the shipwreck it is often purported to be. See A.C.M. BLOMMERDE, “Is There an Ellipsis between Galatians 2,3 and 2,4 ”, Bib 56 (1975) 100-102; B. ORCHARD, “Ellipsis between Galatians 2:3 and 2 : 4 ”, Bib 54 (1973) 469-481; B. ORCHARD, “Once Again the Ellipsis between Gal 2 : 3 and 2:4”, Bib 57 (1976) 254-255, for two different possible understandings of Paul’s grammar. Sorting out the syntax in 2,3-4 is beyond the scope of this paper. E.g., BREHM, “Relationship with Apostles”, 11; DOCKERY, “Paul’s 50 Defense ”, 161. Similarly, DUNN, “Paul and Jerusalem”, 471, says it confirms Paul’s gospel and ministry; and P.E. KOPTAK, “Rhetorical Identification in Paul’s Autobiographical Narrative: Galatians 1:13–2:14”, JSNT 40 (1990) 104-105, his gospel and equality. D.L. BARTLETT, “Preaching to Galatians”, Int 54 (2000) 285, although acknowledging that “the Jerusalem leaders accepted his [Paul’s] apostleship on his terms”, nonetheless sees their