I said to Cephas [aka Peter] in front of them all,
Summary: Conflict resolution can be a challenging topic. In this passage Paul illustrates a technique for dealing with a large group.
There is a passage in Matthew where Jesus teaches us how to resolve conflict between brothers and sisters in the faith. He says:
“If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” (Matthew 18: 15-17)
At first glance, it would seem like Paul is doing the opposite of what Jesus taught. Instead of taking Peter aside, he confronts him in front of a group. What is going on?
The instruction given by Jesus has to do with correcting someone who sins. But what do you do if everyone is sinning?
In this case, Paul is confronted by a delegation from Jerusalem who have decided that all believers need to be circumcised. They apparently represent an even larger group back in Jerusalem who believe circumcision is essential to faith. Paul is not dealing with one person’s sin but many.
What was he to do?
Paul did a very brave thing. He stood up to them.
Even Barnabas, his friend who had traveled to Tarsus to find Paul and bring him to Antioch, had gone over to their side. Paul was alone.
In response to this challenge, Paul put on the armor of God (Ephesians 6: 10-20) and pointed out to Peter that he was being a hypocrite. Peter knew better, but the pressure of going along to get along had caught up with him. Paul brought him back to his senses. After that, the rest followed.
Application: Be willing to stand on God’s Word.
Food for Thought: Why did Paul start with Peter (Cephas)?
It is hard to say (and we only know the details he gives us – maybe he had personal side conversations with others before this public confrontation) but I think Peter was likely seen as a leader to the group. By addressing the leader it is a way to address them all. Maybe the Lord impressed upon Paul to start with Peter. Maybe he knew if Peter got back in line others would follow suit. Either way, Paul was obedient and Peter repented. The courage of one and the humility of the other saved the day as both were led by the Holy Spirit.
Great thoughts, Rich.
I think all of your points are valid. We don’t know, but it can be instructive to meditate on what is revealed to us in the story.
I think we can praise God that this disagreement occurred and that the truth of redemption triumphed in a way that it was recorded for mankind and serves as a light for generations to come. The OT has recorded what happens when men lean into their own understanding and how easily sin can creep in and pervert Gods will for our lives. Peter, as presented in the Bible, shows us a man that when following Christ, and led by the Holy Spirit, did tremendous works for Christ. That same man seemed to be capable of great harm to the message and love Christ brought to the world, even without intension. I think that is true of anyone who is given authority under Christ. I believe many revered Peter’s love and service to Christ. In a sense Peter became a fork in the road. I believe Paul was led to recognize that. The idea of not adding to Christ’s sacrifice is a very important part of undertanding redemption. Peters waivering and Pauls correction was perfectly aligned. To me it speaks to the faithfulness of Christ to bring truth to our lives.
Nice point, Chris!
I appreciate the reminder that the interplay between Peter and Paul is divinely guided by God for our benefit.
02-10-2024, Why did Paul start with Peter (Cephas)?
Great replies!
2:1-3 Fourteen years after first meeting with Peter, Paul with definite orders from God to confer with the brothers about the message he was preaching to the Gentiles. Paul received agreement that it was right, and there were no demands Titus, his Gentile companion, be circumcised.
Peter seems to have possibly ceased to observe Jewish dietary restrictions in response to a heavenly vision Acts 10:9-16, 11:4-10, and ate with the Gentiles. Later, emissaries from James arrived and Peter began to retreat, separate himself from them. Paul seems to have thought that Peter slowly gave in to the pressure that fear of James’s emissaries placed on him, perhaps with a measure of self-doubt
The problem with Peter’s withdrawal from table fellowship with non-Jews was it implied that in addition to what God accomplished for sinful humanity through the atoning death of Christ, people had to contribute something to their own redemption before reconciliation with God was complete and fellowship with other, fully justified Christians was possible.
As the leader of the ministry to the Jews, Peter was now offending the Gentiles and confusing the Jews, and as a brother in Christ, Paul called Peter out regarding the consequences of his poor leadership.
Great summary, Ron!
Leadership in the body of Christ is a BIG responsibility. Having the humility of Peter to take correction is essential to staying in line with God’s will.
It seems to me, Peter is a man of great faith who seems to continue having and acting on impulses which he later corrects. Walking on water and sinking, cutting a mans ear off in defense of Christ, then denying Jesus 3 times. The love of Jesus was always with him, and he just kept turning back to submission to Christ, as He was being transformed.
Sounds familiar!
Blessings,
Ron
Thanks Ron!
I have never seen all those events strung together like that. It paints an interesting picture, doesn’t it? 🙂