Replies

But you need to consider, Paul was telling the Galatians, who would not have not known anything about it much less been involved, so slander is what it actually was.

Yes, if your brother trespasses against you, do go to him privately. But this was not a private action on Peter's part. it was done publicly and his sin involved other Christians.

Peter did not trespass against Paul. He trespassed against the whole church and it needed to be dealt with for the people he hurt.

What is so hard to understand about that? You recall, that the Holy Spirit slew Ananias and Sapphira PUBLICLY for a sin they sinned privately, don't you?

The Holy Spirit saw fit to include the Peter and Paul episode in the Scripture HE breathed out.

Peter was wrong and called on it and the church needed to know how to properly deal with public sin like that.

The NIV says if a brother or sister sins, it does not say against you, the reason for that is likely because it is not even clear what the scripture says.

Is changing seats in Church wrong? I would think the purpose might be the only thing that could make it wrong,

But why would a man just start accusing some one in public with out first going to him privately, it could be hard on his own reputation, not that I have one to lose but I would not do it.

So I wonder about Paul`s intent here more than I do of Peter`s motive..

Peter was wrong and called on it and the church needed to know how to properly deal with public sin like that.>>>>>>>

But it was the wrong Church, why was it not even mentioned at Antioch but only mentioned to the Galatians? was Paul purposely defaming Peter? I am not accusing him of it but I do wonder.

Paul appeared like a lamb at the council of Jerusalem but then out on his own he is like a roaring lion, just trying to figure the reason.