Deviation From The Gospel Series

A new study published in the Religion, Brain and Behavior Journal explored the idea that behavioral models displayed by religious parents are often what crafts their child’s future beliefs. It found when parents are insincere and unfaithful, their offspring have a more difficult time believing their (professed belief) to hold truth. (https://relevantmagazine.com/life5/study-those-raised-by-religious-hypocrites-turn-to-atheism-later-in-life/)

Galatians 2, reports the events in Antioch, where the hypocrasy of the Apostle Peter causes negatively impacted on other Christians like Barnabas, where they changed how the acted and associated when the influential groups like the circumcision party was around. This action promoted a dangerous precedent that had the potential to undermine the truth of the Gospel and testimony of the early church.

One of the greatest challenges today to the Christian message and testimony is where people begin to take their cues of doctrine and practice, not from Scripture, but popular opinion and practice. Often the slide is gradual and unnoticed, but effectively neutering the message and impact of the Gospel.

Consider who is taking their cues of doctrine and practice from you? Who at home, your children, spouse, your friends, family, or coworkers, bases what God expects, from your actions? What in your life does not match your doctrine, and what do you do or say different when influential people are around? This lesson from Galatians 2 is a sobering look how even the greatest among us, like the Apostle Peter himself, can succumb to fear and slip into hypocrisy. Let us take heed, lest we likewise fall (1 Cor. 10:12).

In Galatians 2:11-13 Paul explains Peter’s deviation from the gospel. In this we see 1) The Clash (Galatians 2:11), 2) The Cause (Galatians 2:12) and 3) The Consequence (Galatians 2:13)

We must avoid hypocrisy in presenting any “Deviation from the Gospel” as seen through:

1) THE CLASH (Galatians 2:11)

Galatians 2:11 [11]But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.

The Judaizers had told believers in the Galatian churches that Paul was not a true apostle. But Paul not only was equal to the other apostles but had on this occasion even reprimanded Peter (Cephas), the one who was recognizably the leading apostle among the Twelve. Cephas is the Aramaic form of Peter (Brannan, R., & Loken, I. (2014). The Lexham Textual Notes on the Bible (Ga 2:11). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.)

Both Peter and Paul had experienced salvation by grace through faith, both were directly chosen by the resurrected Jesus Christ to be apostles, and both had been mightily used by the Holy Spirit in establishing and teaching the church. The book of Acts can be divided between the early church ministry that centered on Peter (Acts 1–12) and that which centered on Paul (Acts 13–28). But in Antioch these two men of God came into head-on collision. The incident of vv 11–14 should probably be dated in the period following Barnabas and Paul’s return to Antioch after their mission in Cyprus and South Galatia (Acts 14:26–28). (Bruce, F. F. (1982). The Epistle to the Galatians: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 128). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.)

This Antioch was in Syria (as distinguished from Antioch in Pisidia). Antioch was a major trade center in the ancient world. Heavily populated by Greeks, it eventually became a strong Christian center. In Antioch the believers were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). Antioch in Syria became the headquarters for the Gentile church and was Paul’s base of operations (Barton, B. B. (1994). Galatians (p. 59). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.).

• Allowing a problem to develop in Antioch therefore, could have ramifications in all the other regions where the Gospel would go out. Getting the gospel wrong here and having a faulty lifestyle in response to it has the potential for spreading wrong teaching and practice.

Paul said that “I opposed him to his face”. The word “opposed/withstood” is from anthistemi which means “to set one’s self against, to withstand, resist, oppose.” This verb usually implies that the initial attack came from the other side. It was Peter, in Paul’s mind, who was the aggressor. Although not intentional, yet in effect it was an attack on the position which Paul was maintaining at Antioch. The verb carries the meaning of hindering or forbidding, and was usually applied to defensive measures. It is a defensive measure that action is taken before sin escalates. It is also defensive in terms of the approach. It is not to be done with a sense of superiority or self-righteousness. (Wuest, K. S. (1997). Wuest’s word studies from the Greek New Testament: for the English reader (Vol. 3, p. 69). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.)

Why is reproof important:

Proverbs 15:31-32 [31]The ear that listens to life-giving reproof will dwell among the wise. [32]Whoever ignores instruction despises himself, but he who listens to reproof gains intelligence.