Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: MHGinTN

Only Jesus Christ gave either man any greatness we may attribute to them.


That is true but the issue here is that even if Peter did what he was accused of his accuser was just as wrong because of the way he went about it.

And the reason this is an issue is because some one feels they have to put peter down by saying Paul had to correct peter.


409 posted on 07/27/2015 10:10:07 PM PDT by ravenwolf (If the Bible don`t say it, don`t preach it to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies ]


To: ravenwolf

Peter DID do what he was accused of. He drew back from eating with the Gentiles because he feared the circumcision party when they rolled into town. This was not in line with the truth of the gospel in that there is no longer any dividing wall of hostility between Jew and Gentile because God in Christ made one new man out of the two.

Paul rebuked Peter publicly because it was that serious, Matthew 18 does not apply in this case. We’re not dealing with a private wrong but a public error by an apostle. Clearly God used Paul here to correct Peter. My sense is that Peter received it as from God.

In his defense of his God-given authority, Paul builds a case in which this event is one of the proofs. For some reason you don’t accept that God shows no partiality and WILL rebuke an apostle who seemed to be a pillar to many, but is really just a man needling correction from time to time as we all do.


439 posted on 07/28/2015 5:36:54 AM PDT by avenir (I'm pessimistic about man, but I'm optimistic about GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson