Paul Rebukes Peter
Labels:
Important messages
Chapter 2:11-14 “But
when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood
condemned.
For before certain men came from James,
he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated
himself, fearing the circumcision party.
And the rest of the Jews acted
hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their
hypocrisy.
But when I saw that their conduct was
not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If
you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force
the Gentiles to live like Jews?
Yet Paul does not hesitate a moment in opposing him to the face. Why? “Because he stood condemned” and “acted hypocritically.” His deportment was wrong and, in behaving as he did, he had sinned; there was no question about it. There is no indication given anywhere in the New Testament that Paul was out of order. If it seemed to the Galatians, and if seems to us, that he had acted improperly, it is because they did not, and we do not, understand biblical etiquette. I see nowhere in Scripture, from David to Hezekiah that this was not the manner of treating sin or wrong behavior of any kind. Paul instructed Titus, “Rebuke them sharply” (Tit.1:13). A high percentage of what we have heard concerning submission to leaders is not Bible truth.
Is Paul gossiping and defaming Peter by putting this
incident in writing, not only for the Galatians to see, but all the world up to
this present time? Some would say, “Please Paul, it’s okay for you to expose a
doctrinal error, but leave people out of it. At least, don’t name them.” No,
Paul has a positive purpose, because by exposing Peter and his sin, he is
awaking the Galatians, so that they can see that they are, not only guilty of committing
the same sin, but continue to walk in that sin. It is the sin of fearing man
and following his self-styled religion. Changing behavior to fit the
circumstances, is what is called situation
ethics in our days. By relating this
incident, Paul hopes to show the damning consequences of it. He also mentions
the Christian Jews, who followed Peter’s leadership, and even names his own
partner, Barnabas.
Not only did Paul rebuke an elder, but he did so publicly
before all. Speaking particularly of elders, Paul instructed young Timothy to
continue the practice: “Do not admit a
charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As
for those who persist in sin, rebuke them
in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear” (1
Ti.5:19-20). It is through this teaching that Paul aims to transfer the
Galatians’ fear of men over to the fear of God. He wants them fully aware of
their present condition. They have been deceived and are in serious trouble!
We may know nothing about Judaism, but we have plenty
of experience, when it comes to the fear of man. Similar situations happen
today, always with new details and circumstances, but the fear of man, and the
rewards that men offer, remain as the root problem. Too seldom are these things
thoroughly dealt with. I have seen too many, in the face of a failure in
leadership, who at first, become alarmed. They shift to a lower gear, recover
quickly, then encourage themselves to pick up speed, disassociating themselves
from the sin. This will never do!
They must come to a full stop, put their spiritual
pretentions in reverse, until they come to the place where the sin was first
committed… even if they must go way back to their supposed conversion! From
that point, they need to take a good look around to see how much of their life
and practice has been based on the Bible. Whatever has been outside of
Scripture, for those things, confession and repentance must take place, before
they will be able to make any real progress.
A couple of years ago, I wrote an article called, “The
Bible Puts Man in His Place”, and in it, I quoted a noted authority on religion
and sectarianism, George Erdely: “In the
beginning of the Christian church… there were no delicate leaders, who needed
to be talked to aside, so as not to jeopardize their ‘authority’” Erdely further
states, concerning Paul’s rebuke of Peter, that Paul “is bringing the matter to light in a letter to the Galatians before
the entire church, as an example, in order to build and warn against the same
error. The Bible gives sufficient evidence that Peter recognized his error and
submitted to the Scriptures.
What was the maximum authority among
those who personally saw Jesus? The truth of the Bible. These passages
demonstrate that at the beginning of the Christian church there were not
authoritarian leaders, who were offended whenever there actions were
questioned. The conversation was frank and direct and there was liberty to
speak clearly. The truth of Scripture was the maximum authority and everyone,
including the apostles, submitted to it. We must be careful for those, who do
not follow this rule, because in truth, a classic sign that an organization has
converted into a cult is when, in practice, the leaders are considered a higher
authority than the Bible. A noted university professor explains this fact very
well in his book, A Study Concerning the Sects: ‘A sure sign that we are
in the presence of a cult, is where the maximum authority in spiritual matters
rests on something other than the Holy Scriptures.’”
“The fear of man lays a snare, but
whoever trusts in the Lord is safe” (Prov.29:25). Paul called those, who came up from
Jerusalem under the authority of James, the
circumcision party. Peter, Barnabas and other Jewish Christians in Antioch
changed their behavior in their presence. The fear of man works contrary to
faith in God (see Heb.13:5,6). It sets a trap that brings its victim into
man-service and there, he will be kept in bondage. To fear God is to be free of
the fear of man; that brings safety and freedom. Up until this time, everyone
had been enjoying liberty in Christ along with the newly converted Gentiles. This
change was inexcusable and hypocritical. Imagine how it left the Gentile
believers befuddled and offended.
Peter and the Jews were acting out a crooked lie: “Their conduct was not in step” (in step… Greek, straight-footed), contrary to the straight truth of the gospel. They
are being dishonest and deceptive. Because of Peter’s high position, he was leaving
a strong impression on the Gentiles to practice Judaism… that is, the practice
of separation between Jews and Gentiles. The conclusion would be: If Peter
still practices Judaism, as a Christian, then we must practice it also, to be
separated from the people of the world. It would set them up for the teaching
of circumcision, in order to live a separated Christian life. That is the sign
that separated the Jew from the rest of the world. Barnabas had been working
among the people of Antioch, and his following of Peter, along with the other
Jews, added tremendous weight to the error.
Chapter 2:15-21 “We ourselves are Jews
by birth and not Gentile sinners;
yet we know that a person is not
justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also
have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and
not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be
justified.
But if, in our endeavor to be justified
in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly
not!
For if I rebuild what I tore down, I
prove myself to be a transgressor.
For through the law I died to the law,
so that I might live to God.
I have been crucified with Christ. It is
no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in
the flesh I live by faith in (or of)
the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
I do not nullify the grace of God, for
if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”
What would have happened to the future church if Paul
had not made this firm stand for the gospel? What if the legalistic party from
James had prevailed that day and had been sent out from Antioch into the
mission fields of the world? Where would we be today? Paul continues his rebuke
of these Jewish visitors to Antioch and reminds them of the pure truth of the
gospel. In the language of the Jews, he talks of their pretended superiority,
seeing themselves as the people of God, who follow His laws. They have always
considered the world, outside the circle of Jews, to be sinners.
Then, he speaks to them as Christians, who know the
claims of the gospel, which teaches that no Jew, any more than a Gentile, is
justified by keeping the law. They have all sinned and come short of the glory
of God. Justification comes by putting their trust in the sinless One, the only
One who perfectly kept the law. Without Christ, the Jew is as lost as the
Gentile. Therefore, they must cast themselves upon Jesus in full faith, totally
abandoning hope in their justification through their attempts at keeping the
law. They must hope in the perfection of Christ, in order to be just before
God, covered with His righteousness. No human being has been justified in any
other way.
What happened in Antioch was no minor issue and Paul
goes on to show the gravity of it. In the council meeting in Jerusalem, Peter
asked this question: “Why are you
putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that
neither our fathers now we have been able to bear?” He saw how God had put
His stamp of approval upon Gentiles, who believed, without the works of the
law, but because of their faith in the gospel. Without showing any distinction,
He poured His Spirit upon the Gentiles, exactly as He poured Him upon Jews.
Peter saw that, when the Judaizers demanded that the Gentiles should keep the
law, it was an offense against the God, who had sealed them with His Spirit.
Peter effectively tore down law-bound Judaism. By his actions in Antioch, he
was rebuilding it.
Paul saw that Peter was contradicting his own claim of
salvation only in Christ. His legalistic need to fulfill the law of separation
between Jew and Gentile, in effect, gave the impression that Christ had left
him under sin still to be atoned for by the keeping of the law. If that is the
case, then Peter transgressed, when he tore it down in the first place. That,
at least, is what he was manifesting in the eyes of the Gentile believers. Is
this serious? It is immensely serious. He is, in fact, nullifying the grace of
God towards salvation, showing that we also must keep the law, in order to be
saved. It is to deny everything that God had freely provided for him.
In the next chapter, Paul will teach that the law has
its purpose and that is to bring us to Christ (3:24). The law of God determines
what is sin and what is not sin: “Through
the law comes knowledge of sin” (Ro.3:20). (This is the reason that the law
of God is absolutely essential in evangelism to prove that the individual is a
sinner. No other standard can do this.) Because we have not kept the law, we
stand guilty before God and the sentence is death. Therefore, “I died to the law.” Either I die under
the law or I must die to the law by laying claim to the gospel by faith. That
is the only way that I can live before God.
The condemnation by the law drives us to the
cross of Christ. What Paul states in verse 20 is not theory, but spiritual
reality. If I go the cross, there I will see myself crucified with Christ. I
identify with His death. He took my death sentence and, because I identify with
Him, I died. How then can I try to keep the law, if I have died? Warren Wiersbe
comments: “To go back to Moses is to
return to the graveyard!” Paul’s life ended there on the cross, as ours
did, if we have taken the way of the cross! Then how is it that we still live? It is the life of Christ within our fleshly bodies.
In this text, I believe it is a mistake to say that we
live by faith in the Son of God. The
context is telling us that we have died and Christ lives within us. Therefore,
we cannot live by our faith, but by His faith. Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel
of John makes this truth so evident: “My peace I give to you… that My joy may be in you… abide in My love” (Jn.14:27; 15:9,11), and here, “I live by the faith of the Son of God.”
Where Mark 11:22 commands, “Have faith in God”, it can just as well be translated, “Have the faith of God.” It is a Hebrew
expression, speaking of faith in the superlative sense… the strongest faith. Human
faith can never save; saving faith must come from God. This is of vital importance!
It is the difference between a humanistic, false salvation and a genuine work
of God. “Faith comes through hearing and hearing through the word of Christ” (Ro.10:17). It only comes from God and only comes
through the word of God.
It is impossible to mix grace and the law. The
legalist cannot be a Christian. Paul tells us here that the keeping of the law
nullifies grace. Peter’s actions said, “Grace is not sufficient. We need the
law.” Paul’s inspired revelation by the Holy Spirit says, “If righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no
purpose.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Recommended Books
Post a Comment