How To Be Good Without Being A Hypocrite Series

HYPOCRISY IN THE CHURCH

When I was younger, the church pretty much had the corner on hypocrisy, at least as society told the story. People didn’t want to go to church because it was full of hypocrites. To which we sometimes replied, come on in then, we’ve room for more. And that’s not an unfair accusation.

Recently there has been a whole raft of moral failings by high profile Christian leaders. But it’s not like Christians have a corner on the moral hypocrisy market anymore. In fact, in many ways, parts of society seem to be more moralistic than Christians ever were. There’s love and tolerance for all, unless you don’t accept the dominant ideology. Whether you’re on the right or the left, it’s not enough to treat people well, you have to have the right views lest you get cancelled.

It seems that the more strongly we hold moral views the more we insist others hold them as well, because the results will be catastrophic if we don’t.

It seems that the stronger we hold onto these morals, the harder it is to live by them, as well, and we get into this cycle of bullying, hypocrisy and moral failure.

So how can we be good without being a hypocrite. Or a bully?

This was the kind of problem that the early church was grappling with. For the Jews, the rules, or the Torah Law, were, and still are, vitally important. The Law is the means by which we can live a godly and righteous life and avoid sin.

Paul was arguing that the Christian’s freedom in Christ means the Christian, even the Jewish Christian, is no longer subject to the Law and that the Law could not make us righteous. This opened him up to the charge of lawlessness and promoting sin.

The fear for some of his opponents seems to have been that, just as a game without rules leads to chaos and injury, life without the Law will do the the same.

2.11-14: PETER’S HYPOCRISY

Paul begins this section by recounting a conflict he had with Peter, in verses 11-14. Peter came to Antioch, which had a mixed Jewish and Gentile church, and happily ate with his Gentile brothers and sisters until some members of a strict Jewish-Christian faction arrived. Paul was committed to unity between Jewish and Gentile Christians so, when it became obvious that Peter’s action was going to cause a real division in the church, Paul acted decisively and publicly. Peter was being a hypocrite. His going back to strict Jewish food laws was just people-pleasing and Paul called him out.

Have you ever been called out for something in front of others? You can imagine how Peter felt. As Christians, the rule is usually that we go to the person individually, but Peter’s actions were very public, and Paul deemed the confrontation should be public for the sake of the church. And this was doubly so since Peter held such a high and influential role.

2.15-16: THE INADEQUACY OF THE LAW

Paul then launches into an explanation of why Peter’s actions – and the legalists – were wrong.

In verses 15-16, he says that Jewish Christians had come to realise that they cannot be made righteous by the Law because they simply cannot keep all of its requirements. Just as the Gentiles need to trust in Christ to be made right because they don’t have the Law, so the Jews need to trust in Christ despite having the Law because they can’t be made right by the Law.

2.17: THE DANGER OF LAWLESSNESS

In verse 17 we come to the crux of the problem for the legalists.

We have to fill in the blanks a bit because we only have Paul’s side, not theirs. But the argument seems to be that if we abandon the Law, how are we going to stop sinning?

If you want to play a game, you have to follow the rules. If you take away the rules, it leads to chaos. (Soccer becomes rugby. Which is not a bad thing, but I digress.)

Without the Law, you can call it justification or being made right all you like, but if we abandon the Law, aren’t we Jews going to be just as bad as those Gentile “sinners” who don’t have the Law in the first place?

And what’s worse, if that’s the case, doesn’t that mean we’re accusing Christ of promoting sin, since he’s the reason we’re doing this!?

And when you put it that way, you can see why these legalists are so keen on the rules! And you want to make sure you nail down those rules good and tight.

2.18-21: THE END OF THE LAW

But, of course, Paul gives and emphatic, no!

He says rather enigmatically, “If I rebuild those things that I tore down, I show myself to be a lawbreaker.”