He Walked Not Uprightly (Full) Series

INTRODUCTION

Outline.

1. Paul’s Rebuke

2. Paul’s Reason

3. Paul’s Resolve

Remarks.

1. In our lesson today, we will discuss the theme: “He walked not uprightly.” This sermon deals with an important truth to be heard again by the church, and maybe for the first time the religious world. There may come a time, and today is that time; a man of faith will have to correct his brother's error. This is the situation we find ourselves observing between Peter and Paul. It should be stated: it took tremendous courage to rebuke another, in a public setting. We must applaud Paul for what he did save the church of Christ in Antioch, and the entire world, by fulfilling his apostolic work: "reprove, rebuke, and exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine," 2 Timothy 4:1-3.

2. First, we will consider Paul's rebuke to the "face of Peter." The beloved Paul felt it necessary to: "withstand Peter to his face because he was to be blamed." So egregious was Peter's error; it was needful that Paul corrects him publicly; because the offense was committed publicly. Present at this gathering were: Paul, Peter, Barnabas, the men from James, and the entire family of Jews and Gentiles, in the church of Christ at Antioch. The offense of Peter, Barnabas, and other Jews was before the assembly; at their "love feast," which we call "pot luck" that it presented an example of hypocrisy, that disturbed the “unity and fellowship” of the saints at Antioch. This dissimulation needed to be corrected immediately. The text does not describe Peter's reaction to this criticism, and we can only surmise; he repented of his actions, to the church, and overcame his weakness.

3. Second, we will discuss Paul’s reason for his rebuke of Peter. This was a turbulent time for the church at Antioch. There was a faction growing among the saints regarding the Gentiles entrance into the church. Before certain came from James (the Jerusalem church), Peter did eat with the Gentiles: but when they arrived, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. This withdrawal and separation presented a hypocritical behavior for Peter, Barnabas, and the other Jews. These "men from James were scrutinizing them." They felt it improper for the Jews to eat with these uncircumcised Gentiles. In their judgment, they were yet "publican and sinners." They had not come into Christ, through circumcision and the Law of Moses. Therefore, they were not Christians and not to be eaten with or have fellowship with these unbelievers. Paul would confront this error head-on!

4. Lastly, we will investigate Paul’s resolve in this matter of faith. The beloved apostle Paul understood God's grace and the pattern of conversion for both Jews and Gentiles. He would argue that the Law could save neither Jew nor Gentile; salvation in Christ came through "faith and obedience to the gospel of Christ." Paul would affirm that the Jews must die to law-keeping, and the Gentiles must abandon their idol worship; and God's grace saves both: “through the faith in Christ Jesus," Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:26-27. Paul will affirm that God imparts salvation unto all men: “By grace through the faith, and not by meritorious works,” Ephesians 2:8-9. The Holy Spirit did place some additional restraints upon these Gentile converts, as a result of the Jerusalem Council, Acts 15:23-29. With this brief introduction, let’s consider our first point in this lesson, Paul’s Rebuke, of the Apostle Peter.

BODY OF LESSON

I PAUL’S REBUKE

A. Paul’s rebuke. He wrote: "But when Peter came to Antioch, I (Paul) withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed," Galatians 2:11. The text reads as such in the Greek: “But when Cephas came to Antioch to his face I stood against him because he had been condemned,” The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament, Page 656. This Interlinear, translates the word “blame,” as condemned. Paul wrote: Peter stood self-condemned for his actions! Note the Greek.

1. The word “blame” in Gr., is katagin?sko or kä-tä-ge-no'-sko, which means to note against, i.e., to find fault with:—blame, condemn. The idea is to find fault with, blame; to accuse, or to condemn.

a. Paul wrote he rebuked Peter, because he stood self-condemn by his actions. He uses a similar word in Titus, to describe a heretick.

b. He wrote: “A man that is a heretick after the first and second admonition reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself,” Titus 3:10.

c. That word in Gr., is autokatakritos or au-to-kä-tä'-kre-tos, which means self-condemned:—condemned of self. I think it wise to remind all, that the Lord warned Peter of his weakness and fearful disposition, the night of his betrayal. Recall--