Galatians 2:11-14
But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
Paul was definitely his own person, or God's person, depending on how you look at it. Jesus had spent years with Peter, and it sure seemed to be a long, slow process of growth. And here is Peter again, letting his reactions get the better of him.
I think back to the day of Pentecost, and the boldness of Peter. It kinda puts Peter in a place where I just picture that he is on track now, and not gonna ever blow it again. I guess I can see where the Catholics get it. But Peter was still human. Why should he be any different than anyone else? than me?
I guess Peter was not perfect after all. And Paul called him on it. Not that Paul was perfect, but he had an understanding of truth that went beyond what might be considered normal, and he was not afraid to address what must have been an awkward situation in a righteous manner.
The Bible does not say, but I like to think that Peter handled it in an appropriate manner. I like to think that he recognized his error and took Paul's criticism in stride. But then again, he was Peter...
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Monday, December 24, 2012
Monday Music
There is just something bizarre about posting a Michael Jackson cover that strikes me as I do this, but then I tend to like bizarre stuff...so here goes...
I enjoy the music of Sidewalk Prophets. And I understand their covering this song. Change does start with me, but my change starts at the cross. Somehow, I think Michael missed that part.
Christmas is about a baby born in a manger, and how one wrought a change that is still felt 2,000 years later. But I believe that is true because of the supernatural nature of that change. If my change is to be real, it is not about what people will say of me when my life is but a whisper, but it is who I am with that matters.
Now...how about a cover for Thriller, video and dance steps included?
I enjoy the music of Sidewalk Prophets. And I understand their covering this song. Change does start with me, but my change starts at the cross. Somehow, I think Michael missed that part.
Christmas is about a baby born in a manger, and how one wrought a change that is still felt 2,000 years later. But I believe that is true because of the supernatural nature of that change. If my change is to be real, it is not about what people will say of me when my life is but a whisper, but it is who I am with that matters.
Now...how about a cover for Thriller, video and dance steps included?
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Lapping Up God's Word - Yum!
Galatians 2:6-10
And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
A lot of people make the Bible into a gushy book full of love and nothing else. But that is not the truth. Jesus often confronted people, he turned over tables, he turned people off with his words. Paul was also a no-nonsense kind of guy. Even though at one time he was one of the influential people, or at least on the fast track to being one, he now thought nothing of earthly influence, not even when it came to the apostles. I don't think he disrespected them, but he did not let their position cause him to place them on a pedestal. They were both charged with sharing the same gospel. Apparently, the apostles felt the same about Paul. They were not in awe of him, but were encouraged when they saw what God was doing through him.
How far we have gotten from this, when preachers are placed on stages and television, and we lap up every word as if it were God himself who were speaking. Yum! Not a hint of bitterness here! I am not saying that God does not speak through preachers who speak the truth, but we have a responsibility in this too. I love that the apostles remind Paul not to forget the poor. Looking at the lifestyles of our current "evangelists," can we say that they have done the same?
I guess I just look for a balance. Preaching truth where my responsibility is to be discerning and be responsible for living truth out for myself. Jesus turned tables because those who had been entrusted with truth abused it. And everyone there just saw it as normal. Perhaps because they had lost tune with the God whom they were worshiping. I don't want to lose that vision.
And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
A lot of people make the Bible into a gushy book full of love and nothing else. But that is not the truth. Jesus often confronted people, he turned over tables, he turned people off with his words. Paul was also a no-nonsense kind of guy. Even though at one time he was one of the influential people, or at least on the fast track to being one, he now thought nothing of earthly influence, not even when it came to the apostles. I don't think he disrespected them, but he did not let their position cause him to place them on a pedestal. They were both charged with sharing the same gospel. Apparently, the apostles felt the same about Paul. They were not in awe of him, but were encouraged when they saw what God was doing through him.
How far we have gotten from this, when preachers are placed on stages and television, and we lap up every word as if it were God himself who were speaking. Yum! Not a hint of bitterness here! I am not saying that God does not speak through preachers who speak the truth, but we have a responsibility in this too. I love that the apostles remind Paul not to forget the poor. Looking at the lifestyles of our current "evangelists," can we say that they have done the same?
I guess I just look for a balance. Preaching truth where my responsibility is to be discerning and be responsible for living truth out for myself. Jesus turned tables because those who had been entrusted with truth abused it. And everyone there just saw it as normal. Perhaps because they had lost tune with the God whom they were worshiping. I don't want to lose that vision.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Huh?
Galatians 2:3-5
Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
In verses 1 and 2, Paul seemed to be questioning if he were doing the right thing, preaching the right gospel. I understand this, because the gospel that Paul was preaching was counter-intuitive. It just makes sense that we owe God, and that we should have to do something to pay that debt. We should desire to earn God's favor, because we are not perfect. There must be some element of the law that we can still cling to.
But not even Titus was compelled to be circumcised. If the Jews were going to keep any element of the law in place, it would seem circumcision would be a logical choice. It was instituted by God and labeled them, set them apart. Titus was a Greek, not a Jew. One would think that he would want ot make sure that he was safe, that he was a part of the "in" group. Why not be circumcised, if for no other reason than to play it safe? But Titus was confident that not only was no such action needed, it would be a hindrance to his faith. This was a part of hte freedom that Titus had found in Christ. Not a freedom to do anything that he wanted, but a freedom that meant he was not bound to the fruitless requirements of a legalistic system that couldn't fix the problem of sin.
Others observed this, and couldn't comprehend it. Or they simply did not want to give up the control that it gave to them. Sure, Christ saves, but they wanted the debt and allegiance of others to continue. Remember the later church's idea of indulgences? Same principle. You can be free in Christ! Now follow us in obedience to these laws and freedom will be yours.
Huh?
Our freedom in Christ does free us from the law, but it does so in order that our service to Christ will be a response of love that honors him. That is the truth that Paul wanted to preserve! No one suffered more for the cross than Paul, but he did it not out of obligation to a set of rules. He did it as a response to what Christ had done for him.
Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
In verses 1 and 2, Paul seemed to be questioning if he were doing the right thing, preaching the right gospel. I understand this, because the gospel that Paul was preaching was counter-intuitive. It just makes sense that we owe God, and that we should have to do something to pay that debt. We should desire to earn God's favor, because we are not perfect. There must be some element of the law that we can still cling to.
But not even Titus was compelled to be circumcised. If the Jews were going to keep any element of the law in place, it would seem circumcision would be a logical choice. It was instituted by God and labeled them, set them apart. Titus was a Greek, not a Jew. One would think that he would want ot make sure that he was safe, that he was a part of the "in" group. Why not be circumcised, if for no other reason than to play it safe? But Titus was confident that not only was no such action needed, it would be a hindrance to his faith. This was a part of hte freedom that Titus had found in Christ. Not a freedom to do anything that he wanted, but a freedom that meant he was not bound to the fruitless requirements of a legalistic system that couldn't fix the problem of sin.
Others observed this, and couldn't comprehend it. Or they simply did not want to give up the control that it gave to them. Sure, Christ saves, but they wanted the debt and allegiance of others to continue. Remember the later church's idea of indulgences? Same principle. You can be free in Christ! Now follow us in obedience to these laws and freedom will be yours.
Huh?
Our freedom in Christ does free us from the law, but it does so in order that our service to Christ will be a response of love that honors him. That is the truth that Paul wanted to preserve! No one suffered more for the cross than Paul, but he did it not out of obligation to a set of rules. He did it as a response to what Christ had done for him.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
I find this insane!
Galatians 2:1,2
Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
So Paul has been at work for 14 years! Think about all the highs and lows, the victories for the cause of Christ, the personal suffering he had to endure. So then he goes to Jerusalem to meet with those who were the leaders. And Paul presented what he believed the gospel to be. 14 years into it, and he wants to make sure that he has not been doing all of this in error?
First, let's stop and look why he went. He went in response to a revelation. The Holy Spirit was guiding him to go to Jerusalem. He knew he was going to talk to the leaders of the church. Was this because he had been doing something wrong? We all know that feeling, when you are called before someone of importance and we don't know why. Be it boss or parent or the boss's boss, our mind sometimes begins to wander, thinking, "What could I have done wrong?"
I am not sure if I see a moment of doubt here, or a moment of humility, or perhaps both. There is nothing wrong with a moment of doubt, and certainly nothing wrong with humility either. I like that Paul is open and honest, whatever the reason, and is willing to listen. I pray that I would be that way. And I pray that all leaders would be that way.
How crazy, after 14 years, for Paul to consider if he had been running his race in vain. The only thing crazier would be for him not to consider such a thing.
Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
So Paul has been at work for 14 years! Think about all the highs and lows, the victories for the cause of Christ, the personal suffering he had to endure. So then he goes to Jerusalem to meet with those who were the leaders. And Paul presented what he believed the gospel to be. 14 years into it, and he wants to make sure that he has not been doing all of this in error?
First, let's stop and look why he went. He went in response to a revelation. The Holy Spirit was guiding him to go to Jerusalem. He knew he was going to talk to the leaders of the church. Was this because he had been doing something wrong? We all know that feeling, when you are called before someone of importance and we don't know why. Be it boss or parent or the boss's boss, our mind sometimes begins to wander, thinking, "What could I have done wrong?"
I am not sure if I see a moment of doubt here, or a moment of humility, or perhaps both. There is nothing wrong with a moment of doubt, and certainly nothing wrong with humility either. I like that Paul is open and honest, whatever the reason, and is willing to listen. I pray that I would be that way. And I pray that all leaders would be that way.
How crazy, after 14 years, for Paul to consider if he had been running his race in vain. The only thing crazier would be for him not to consider such a thing.
Monday, December 17, 2012
I don't know when I first ran across this video, but it has only been a few years back. I heard it on a Bebo Norman CD, and later found out it was written by Jackson Browne.
I used to listen to Jackson long ago, back when he wrote things like "Doctor My Eyes." I imagine that this was written around that time and just never got a lot of play. At least that is what I like to think.
I don't think Jackson views himself as a Christian, at least not in the traditional sense. I think he is rather turned off by Christians actually. After listening to this song, I can see why.
What do I need to change about how I treat Christmas this year?
I used to listen to Jackson long ago, back when he wrote things like "Doctor My Eyes." I imagine that this was written around that time and just never got a lot of play. At least that is what I like to think.
I don't think Jackson views himself as a Christian, at least not in the traditional sense. I think he is rather turned off by Christians actually. After listening to this song, I can see why.
What do I need to change about how I treat Christmas this year?
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Deep and Wide
Galatians 1:17-24
Paul was converted and immediately begins a missionary journey. He does not feel the need to get the rubber stamp of approval from the Apostles. I find this a bit curious, as the Bible is clear about the fact that we should be submissive to leaders, but then again, how often does one's conversion come as a direct result of an encounter with Jesus?
I love the idea that Paul's conversion is a matter of public discussion. I liken it to the idea of a Richard Dawkins type becoming a Christian. C. S. Lewis comes to mind.
It also reminds me of Christ's teaching the he who is forgiven much loves much, and he who is forgiven little loves little.
Lord, help me see the depth of my salvation!
17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.
18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas[b] and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.
21 Then I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they praised God because of me.
Paul was converted and immediately begins a missionary journey. He does not feel the need to get the rubber stamp of approval from the Apostles. I find this a bit curious, as the Bible is clear about the fact that we should be submissive to leaders, but then again, how often does one's conversion come as a direct result of an encounter with Jesus?
I love the idea that Paul's conversion is a matter of public discussion. I liken it to the idea of a Richard Dawkins type becoming a Christian. C. S. Lewis comes to mind.
It also reminds me of Christ's teaching the he who is forgiven much loves much, and he who is forgiven little loves little.
Lord, help me see the depth of my salvation!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)