Peter was wrong and called on it and the church needed to know how to properly deal with public sin like that.
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.
You do know, I hope, that the epistles Paul wrote were copied and distributed to ALL the churches just as Peter's, James', Jude's and John's letters were. Together with the four gospel books they made up what is called the New Testament. Though some letters were written to specific city churches, they were distributed to all churches. Whatever was written to one church (Galatians, for example) was still true and relevant to ALL the Christians throughout the world just as they are today.
You seem to be having some heartburn about Paul's public rebuke of Peter, but look at what he said was going on. Peter didn't say anything to Paul's face - it was not something Peter did TO Paul, Paul heard it from many of the Christians he came into contact with, probably even Barnabas was telling him what Peter was doing. Antioch was a large city with a big Christian presence, MANY people were affected by Peter's error. If Paul had only gone to Peter to discuss personally Peter's wrongdoing - and we don't know that he didn't try, do we - then wouldn't there STILL have been some kind of public confession and correction? From the passage in Galatians, it sounds like it was a well known problem for all the Gentiles and Paul was correct in how he handled the public correction. The good news of the gospel should NEVER be allowed to be compromised. I don't see how Paul was sinning against Peter by doing what needed to be done.
You know, my question would be, why didn't James do something about it first? He was head over the Jerusalem church - the base. Why was it left to the "newcomer" Paul? I believe this was one of the reasons why God used Paul for so much of the New Testament writings.
Which is a good reason to go to the Greek.
In the Greek, it says.... *sins against you*....
http://biblehub.com/text/matthew/18-15.htm
Well, the KJV you posted along with the NIV, DID say *against you*, which is also found in the original Greek.
Not even a good try.