INTRODUCTION
Outline.
2. Paul’s Reason
Remarks.
1. This is lesson 2, in the sermon-series entitled: “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. In this lesson, 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! With this brief introduction, let’s consider lesson 2, in this sermon-series, Paul’s Reason, for his rebuke of Peter.
BODY OF LESSON
II PAUL’S REASON
A. Paul’s reason. He continues: “For before those certain came from James (the Jerusalem church), he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they came, 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,” Galatians 2:12-13.
B. Before certain came from James. These were converted Jews to Christ, who kept many of the customs of Moses, Acts 21:17-25. They were from the churches of Judea, perhaps some even from the Jerusalem church. Peter must have known of their teachings and their dislike of Jews eating with the Gentiles. Paul had no quarrels in “keeping the customs of Moses,” Romans 13:7-8. His dispute with the “men from James,” was their insistence that they must be observed for “salvation sake.” Circumcision was a matter of “cleanliness,” not salvation! However, the matter of withdrawing and separating oneself while eating with the Gentiles, presented a deeper problem among the church. It was discriminatory! Paul continued--
1. Peter did eat with the Gentiles. The words “did eat” in Gr., is synesthio or sün-es-the'-o, which means to take food in company with:—eat together. The idea is to dine with or eat together with another.
2. Until the sect, “the men from James” came to Antioch, Peter, Barnabas, and the other Jews: ate with the Gentile saints, uninhibited. They followed the apostolic practice: “to eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,” Acts 2:46.
3. B. W. Johnson wrote: “Thou…didst eat with them. This was a positive violation, not of the laws of Moses, but...the rules of the orthodox Jews. Though Peter laid aside his Jewish exclusiveness at Cæsarea, he at least once afterward(s) relapsed (Gal. 2:12),” Page 293.
4. Peter had eaten with the Gentiles in Caesarea and Antioch. He staggered in his practice of eating with them, only when the sect of the Pharisees (certain from James), came to Antioch. He did this in fear of these of the circumcision. We have discussed this earlier, so no more will be added here.
C. Certain men from James came to Antioch. Anytime the church is growing and walking in the gospel's faith, evil will eventually show up to cause contention and confusion, among the saints. These sectarians from James have come to Antioch, to sow their divisive doctrine of “circumcision and the law of Moses,” Acts 15:24. Paul calls these “certain men” “false brethren” which came in privily to spy out our liberty in Christ,” Galatians 2:4. Once they're in the assembly, their presence negatively influenced Peter's usual behavior among the Gentiles. Observe--
1. Peter withdrew from the Gentiles. We now get to the essential issues in Peter's actions. Paul wrote: "Peter... withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision,” Galatians 2:12.
a. Paul tells us about his actions; and why he so acted before the church. We are going to look at both of these words in Greek. Consider--
b. The word “withdrew” in Gr., is hypostello or hü-po-ste'l-lo, which means to withhold under (out of sight), i.e. (reflexively) to cower or shrink, to conceal (reserve):—draw (keep) back, shun, withdraw. The word means to withdraw one's self, i.e., to be timid, to behave cowardly, or shrink down.
c. Peter shun and withdrew himself from their combined dining location; and set up a separate eating place, for himself, other Jews, and eventually Barnabas. He did this in fear of the "certain from James." Peter was attempting to set the appearance that this was the Jew's typical eating arrangement (separated).
d. These men were of the sect of the Pharisees who, like Paul, had become Christians, but unlike him, had retained their Jewish bigotry. Perhaps some of them were Paul's old friends. Their presence spurred fear among Peter and other Jews, causing them to segregate themselves from the Gentiles.
2. And Peter separated from them. Paul continued: “He separated himself from them.” The word “separate” in Gr., is aphorizo or ä-fo-re'-zo, which means to set off by boundary, i.e., limit, exclude, appoint, etc.—divide, separate, sever. The idea is to mark off from others by boundaries, to limit, and to separate them as disreputable or (as disgraceful).
a. Early in my youth, in Los Angeles, CA. I attended a Billy Graham Crusade. When I entered the sanctuary, with a half dozen other young people of color, we were escorted to a roped-off area in the arena.
b. Even now, when I reflect on this experience, I am still moved to tears. To this day, I am ashamed that this worldwide evangelist, in the Evangelical Movement, who “separated” people of color at his Crusade, from other (white) attendees.
c. I know personally how these Gentile saints felt during this experience of withdrawal and separation from their Jewish brothers and sisters. I am afraid; this same behavior occurs in many assemblies across the nation and the world.
d. This behavior should shame any true believer. These men from James, those "of the circumcision," promoted racial segregation, separating the Jews from the Gentiles in the first century. This same problem exists among many religious groups today; and, even within the churches of Christ. I say this to our shame.
3. They no longer ate with them. Paul was describing then, a condition that prevails in American religious groups every Sunday. The hours between 10 AM to 1:00 PM is the most segregated time in America. This separation “segregation” exists in what should be the most sacred time during the week: the hours of worship unto God. I am confident, that most of these assemblies struggle with what Peter did then: “the fear of the segregationist.”
NOTE: Illustrate, First Sunday Singing. In one of the churches in AL; I was invited to preach one Sunday morning and remain over, to speak to the churches that assembled for their first Sunday Singing. The church was evenly split between white and black members. After worship, we all dined together. However, many of the white members did not attend the singing. You can hear my comments regarding this behavior, in my message that afternoon. Copy and paste this link in your browser, https://archive.org/details/AlicevilleInSearchOfAMan
D. Fearing them of the circumcision. Paul tells us why Peter behaved the way he did. He feared the men from the circumcision. Fear makes cowards of us all! Observe--
1. Solomon wrote: “The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe,” Proverbs 29:25.
2. Isaiah wrote: “And of whom hast thou been afraid or feared, that thou hast lied, and hast not remembered me, nor laid it to thy heart? Have not I held my peace even of old, and thou fearest me not?” Isaiah 57:11.
3. Peter’s fear of the men. It was Peter’s fear of arrest and death; that caused him to deny that he even knew the man (Jesus). He now fears retribution and reprisal from the “certain which came from James.”
a. These were the same men; Peter encountered in Jerusalem after he visited Cornelius' house. Observe--
b. Paul wrote: “But when they came, he (Peter) withdrew and separated himself (from the Gentile saints), fearing them which were of the circumcision,” Galatians 2:12; Acts 11:2-3. Once again, Peter's fear caused him to sin against the Lord and the saints in Antioch's church.
c. Peter was not acting like that “bold fearless preacher,” we have witnessed earlier in his ministry, as he stood before the Sanhedrin Council. Luke wrote: “But Peter and John answered and said unto them: Whether it is right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge you. We cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard,” Acts 4:19-20; Acts 5:29; Acts 5:41-42.
d. It appears that Peter has lost his courage and resolved to stand-up in defense of the gospel of Christ, amidst all opposition. To be unafraid of what men say and do unto him. Paul will help Peter find his way back to the truth, and courage before his peers and opposition. Let’s look a little closer, at the “eating of meats.”
3. Paul wrote of eating meats and our behavior before the weak brothers, so as not to cause them to stumble, or offend. Observe--
a. First, “And through thy knowledge (of eating meats) shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat makes my brother offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother offend,” 1 Corinthians 8:11-13.
b. Further, “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. Give none offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor the church of God: Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved,” 1 Corinthians 10:31-33.
c. Next, “Let us not, therefore, judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of its own: but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, it is unclean. But if thy brother is grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died...God's kingdom is not meat and drink, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For us that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men,” Romans 14:13-18; Romans 14:19-23; Titus 1:15-16.
d. Finally, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if eaten with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer,” 1 Timothy 4:1-5.
f. Conclusion: To eat meat, or not to eat meat: neither is a sin. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it is received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. The Gentiles' diet included meat. The Jew's diet included herbs, and only a small portion of certain meats determine to be clean, by their customs.
4. The other Jews. The other Jewish saints in the congregation at Antioch followed Peter's action. This influential apostolic leader exhibited divisive behavior before the entire church.
a. His actions disrupted the unity and fellowship that existed among them, before these Judaizers (certain came from James), arrived at the Antioch church.
b. It was probably their intention to cause precisely what occurred in Antioch. To infer by eating with the Gentiles, they were eating with unbelievers.
c. The men of the circumcision made their position known. Luke wrote: “And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren and said: Except you be circumcised after Moses's manner, you cannot be saved...When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them...they determined Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. And being brought on their way by the church (of Antioch); they passed through Phenice and Samaria.” Luke continued--
1) First, “And when they came to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and the apostles and elders, they declared all things that God had done with them.”
2) Further, “But there arose certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying: That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the Law of Moses,” Acts 15:1-5; Acts 15:24.
3) Next, the Judaizers position was straight forward. The Gentile believers must be circumcised and keep the law that they might be saved. This was the message of the: “Certain that came from James,” Galatians 2:12. Perhaps, they were in the audience. We now see the gravity of the doctrine being propagated by "these false brethren."
4) Additionally, these were: “false brethren...who came in privily to spy our liberty in Christ Jesus...whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue in you,” Galatians 2:4-5.
5) Finally, this teaching contradicts Peter and Paul's preaching that the "just shall live by faith in Christ Jesus," Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9.
d. They might have used James’ name; in that, he seemed to be one of the "pillars in the church at Jerusalem," Galatians 2:9. Peter and John were the others.
5. They dissembled likewise with him. Paul wrote: “They dissembled likewise with him (Peter),” Galatians 2:13. The word “dissembled,” in Gr., is synypokrinomai or sün-ü-po-kre'-no-mi, which means to act hypocritically in concert with:—dissemble thyself, or with others. The other Jews acted hypocritically, just like Peter, before the “men from James.”
6. Paul wrote: “Let love be unhypocritical, abhorring the evil, clinging to the good; with brotherly love to one another, loving dearly in honor preferring one another,” Romans 12:9-10. The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament, Page 566. See also Philippians 2:1-3. Paul continued--
E. Insomuch Barnabas. This dissimulation also infected Barnabas. The close friend and fellow-worker of Paul. This was extremely serious because Barnabas was one of the prophets and apostles at the Antioch church.
1. Was also carried away (behaved in like fashion). Barnabas was taken back by Peter and the other Jew's behavior – refusing to no longer eat with the Gentiles. A practice they had long before enjoyed.
2. "Even Barnabas," the one least likely to have been led into such an error, being with Paul, the first to preach to the Gentiles. He now demonstrated the recklessness of a bad example; before the church, he provided oversight and spiritual guidance.
a. Antioch was the capital of Gentile Christianity and the central point of its missionary efforts. This controversy began here and will end there as a result of Paul and Barnabas's work, Acts 15:30-35.
b. Paul has now encountered this “sect of the Pharisees," which will consistently persecute him for his labors among the Gentile churches, Acts 13:50-52; 1 Timothy 3:10-13; Acts 20:19; Acts 20:23-24.
3. Barnabas is now practicing the same dissimulations (hypocrisy). The dishonest act of an influential leader: caused many of the Christians at Antioch to error, Isaiah 9:16; Matthew 15:14. Observe--
a. Barnabas was a leader in the church at Antioch, along with Paul, Acts 13:1-3.
b. He and Paul had conducted a missionary journey into the Gentile Nations.
c. Why did he follow this practice of “withdrawal and separation?”
d. This was the real sin of Peter. He instituted membership segregation (by separating himself from the Gentiles), in the church at Antioch. This was the first demonstration of racial discrimination in the first-century church. Paul will battle this schism throughout his entire apostolic work.
1) I have preached against it for 55 years. It appears to me at times that (my labor has been to no avail). But, later I acknowledge, if I could help just one brother overcome this evil: “My labors will not have been in vain, in the Lord,” 1 Corinthians 15:58.
2) I confess that I have known and worked with many white brothers; whose lives were purged of this sin, after their conversion to Christ. They were mostly military men, while I was in the United States Army. I thank God for them.
e. Barnabas also was carried away; with the disgraceful behavior of Peter, before the entire assembly. Why? He, too, had a fear of the Jews: “the certain men that came from James," which “were of the circumcision,” Galatians 2:12.
4. The practice of racial segregation. America has long been guilty of practicing racial discrimination in schools, businesses, and worship. Unfortunately, the churches of Christ have also been guilty of this sin against the brethren. Why does this practice of segregation exist among the brethren? The answer has not changed: “for fear of the men from James.”
a. This Nation, for nearly 243 years, has allowed the powers of America to deal treacherously and discriminately with some of its population. These powers (political and police officials) have subjected some of its people to tyranny, cruelty, beatings, oppression, and even killings. Today, these acts are still being sanctioned by most clergy and ministers of this Nation, by their deafening silence.
1) Many have “sat in silence” to the recent killing of George Floyd, a black man, at the hands of 4 white police officers. Have any of them spoken against this evil from their pulpits? I doubt there is even a mentioning of it in their private conversations. It is time for bold, decisive action by ministers, evangelists, and leaders of the Lord's church. We must preach against these injustices.
2) It is high time for America to: “Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap in mercy; break up your fallow ground: for it is time to seek the LORD, till he comes and rain righteousness upon you,” Hosea 10:12; Isaiah 45:8; Amos 5:24.
3) Thank God for our youth. The youth of America in, and out of the church, have been stirred up in their hearts against the wickedness and corruption in all levels of government for the lack of equality and justice in our police forces.
a) They have come from all walks of life, from all races, religions, and standing, to say in their protest that: “justice must be for all Americans.”
b) The badges of police officers must be a sign of their resolve to “protect and serve” the people of their communities.
c) For decades, it has been a symbol of brutality, abuse, and murder among many citizens in America. There are reasons for this problem.
b. White silence. These abuse and injustices exist because of “white silence.” The oppressors continue their wrongdoing because they are not chastised by their peers: the so-called righteous "white people of America." Their silence has permitted these acts of terrorism, brutality, and reprisals to continue in America. Hear me good!
1) I am speaking directly to the white clergy and ministers of this Nation, even among the Lord's church.
2) Your pulpits have remained silent to these atrocities regarding American Politics, Law Enforcement, and systemic racism, far too long.
3) This generation of “white silence” reminds me of the same kind of people who ignored the struggles of black people during the “Civil Rights Movement.”
4) It took a letter to them from Martin Luther King, while he sat in a Birmingham Jail, to arouse their conscience to the Nation's evils. Who do we serve? To remain silent is to acknowledge our consent to these terrible injustices.
c. Systemic Racism. Systemic Racism continues today because the white clergy and ministers do not speak out against it. I adjure you in the name of the Lord: to speak out against this ungodliness. Paul took decisive actions against it!
d. Opportunity for leadership. I am calling upon you not to behave like Peter in Antioch. God allowed him to demonstrate true Christian Leadership, but, he failed, for fear of his Jewish brothers.
e. Don't abandon the Lord, the church, and the youth of America (some of them are our children). Stand with them! It took Paul to rebuke Peter of his weakness and fear of these segregationists from the church at Jerusalem.
1) Some of you are likewise guilty! Let the changes that are currently sweeping America; enlighten your congregations, to the necessity of genuine Christian fellowship.
2) Churches of Christ: tear down this “wall of segregation” in your assemblies!
3) Heaven will be well pleased. And this example will “draw many unto Christ,” John 12:32. As I begin to conclude this lesson, recall we discussed--
CONCLUSION
A. Outline.
2. Paul’s Reason
B. Summarize main points.
1. We discussed 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.
2. 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!
C. Invitation. Present the pattern of conversion, H.B.R.C.B.
D. Exhortation.
E. Motivation.
References:
1. Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible, by Matthew Henry, Christian Classics Ethereal Library, Grand Rapids, MI, 1706.
2. The People's New Testament, by B. W. Johnson, Christian Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI, 1891.
3. The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament; United Bible Societies,’ Fourth, Corrected Edition, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL, 1990.
4. Textus Receptus, taken from the Greek Text of Stephens 1550, The Englishman’s Greek New Testament, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, First Zondervan Printing, 1970.
5. Clarke Commentary on the Bible, Eight Volumes, Published 1810-1826, New York, Published by J. Emory and B. Waugh, for the Methodist Episcopal Church, at the conference office, 13 Crosby-Street., J. Collord, Printer, 1831.
6. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, by W. E. Vine, Fleming H. Revell Company, Old Tappan, NJ, Copyright, 1981.
