7 reasons why Peter was not perfect after Pentecost and was guilty of sin.

[ChristisGod]

I will call this Paul's sevenfold rebuke of Peters hypocrisy and beak it down with scripture not my opinion.

Paul's words to Peter were as follows:

1) I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
2)he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
3) The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy,
4) so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
5)they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel
6)You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew
7)you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs

You can read the story in Galatians 2.

And please don't blame me for this blame God, Paul and Peter since God included in His word and Paul confronted Peter.

BTW- if Peter an Apostle could not reach a sinless state post indwelling of the Holy Spirit what on earth makes you think you are above Peter in reaching sinlessness ?

hope this helps !!!

 

[Enoch111]

BTW- if Peter an Apostle could not reach a sinless state post indwelling of the Holy Spirit what on earth makes you think you are above Peter in reaching sinlessness ?

I don't believe anyone has claimed sinless perfection for Peter. But your title including "guilty of sin" is rather extreme.

If you are thinking of those who believe that Peter was the first pope, that is another subject entirely.

 

[ChristisGod]

I don't believe anyone has claimed sinless perfection for Peter. But your title including "guilty of sin" is rather extreme.

If you are thinking of those who believe that Peter was the first pope, that is another subject entirely.

is hypocrisy a sin ?

 

[justbyfaith]

First of all, the kjv tells us not that he "stood condemned", but rather that he was "to be blamed."

This latter rendering would be more accurate in light of John 5:24 (kjv). And the kjv of John 5:24 is more accurate than the way that many modern versions translate it because the way that they translate it, it is in contradiction to Romans 14:10-12, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, and 2 Corinthians 5:10. Whereas in the kjv, there is no contradiction.

Secondly, The idea that Peter was being a hypocrite is merely Paul's judgment. As the apostle to the Gentiles, Paul was concerned with the gospel to the Gentiles and the effect that the gospel itself would have on the Gentiles.

Peter's behaviour would have a negative aspect on that gospel; and therefore he was indeed "to be blamed".

However, Peter was himself being obedient to principles that Paul very well had set forth in 1 Corinthians 8 and in Romans 14 and Romans 15:1-3. In that he catered to the consciences of the Jewish people who had just entered into the situation. If you read these passages carefully, I believe that you will see that Peter was being obedient to the principles found therein.

Therefore, I believe that he was caught between a rock and a hard place; and because he himself was the preacher of the gospel to the circumcision, I believe that he was not even thinking of the gospel to the Gentiles. If he had been, he most certainly would have attempted to take into account the consciences of the Gentiles also who were present. How that would have looked is beyond me. His actions and behaviour were perfectly in conjunction with the passages in question (1 Corinthians 8, Romans 14, Romans 15:1-3).

Therefore I believe that Peter was going according to his conscience and was not therefore caught in any kind of willful sin.

Did his behaviour have repercussions? You betcha; and that is why it can be said that he "was to be blamed."

But did Peter sin; and was it actual hypocrisy that he was exhibiting? I don't think so.

 

[ChristisGod]

You clearly deny scripture but that is to be expected when one espouses the heresy of sinless perfection.

 

[justbyfaith]

You clearly deny scripture but that is to be expected when one espouses the heresy of sinless perfection.

Again, "sinless perfection" is a misnomer that is applied to the doctrine of entire sanctification in order to create a straw man that is easily toppled by 1 John 1:8.

When in all reality, the doctrine does not proclaim that sin is eradicated from the believer (i.e. that the believer is sinless, without sin, having no sin) but rather that the element of sin is rendered dead within him (Romans 6:6, Galatians 5:24, Romans 7:8) so that it no longer has any say over his behaviour (Romans 6:14).

That entire sanctification is a faithful doctrine is evident in the following scriptures.

1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Hebrews 10:14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9;

Jude 1:24, 2 Peter 1:10, 1 John 2:10;

1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:3, 1 John 2:6;

1 John 3:6, 1 John 2:17;

Romans 6:6, Colossians 2:11 (nlt).

 

[Ziggy]

I will call this Paul's sevenfold rebuke of Peters hypocrisy and beak it down with scripture not my opinion.

Paul's words to Peter were as follows:

1) I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
2)he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
3) The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy,
4) so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
5)they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel
6)You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew
7)you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs

You can read the story in Galatians 2.

And please don't blame me for this blame God, Paul and Peter since God included in His word and Paul confronted Peter.

BTW- if Peter an Apostle could not reach a sinless state post indwelling of the Holy Spirit what on earth makes you think you are above Peter in reaching sinlessness ?

hope this helps !!!

Is it Peter's turn??

I had a pow wow with Paul a little ways back. It didn't go over too well. But that's how you get to the root of the problem.
Pulling teeth never feels good. I know, I don't have any left. But I don't get toothaches no more either.

You have to go back to the Gospels... follow Peter. Just follow him, watch.
Then move on to Paul.
Is Paul justified in his accusations?
I find them both questionable as to being "perfect" .

If Peter supposed to be out spreading the Gospel, why is he spending so much time in Jerusalem in the hot seat?
I thought Jesus said if you want to be a leader, you need to be a servant instead.
And not to take the best seats in the house.
Peter, James and Joses... because Joses is John, James's brother.
These 3 always together.. pillars.. even..

Get in the ring and go thrash it out. If you don't it will drive you crazy for years.
Something about 3 frogs... idk.. just thinking
Good Luck
Hugs

 

[Ziggy]

Just an FYI,
I'm working on a study of Ephesus and Ephesians.
There is some interesting idolatry with this Goddess Diana and all of Asia and the world bowed down to this Idol in the temple.
Peter is dealing with the same issues Paul is at the same time.
I'm just saying.. the world wasn't like what they make it look like in the movies.
Peter and Paul both taking on the political/religious/commerce issues.. of the day.. like today..

Be a fair judge if ye plan to judge.. things aren't always as they seem.

Much Love
Hugs

 

[Enoch111]

is hypocrisy a sin ?

When you consider the circumstances of that time, it is understandable that a very strict Jew -- such as Peter -- would have a very difficult time mingling with Gentiles. So we must make allowance for Peter's growth in this area. Paul on the other hand had lived in Tarsus (in modern Turkey), which was outside Palestine. He had mingled with Gentiles in the past.

 

[Ziggy]

When you consider the circumstances of that time, it is understandable that a very strict Jew -- such as Peter -- would have a very difficult time mingling with Gentiles. So we must make allowance for Peter's growth in this area. Paul on the other hand had lived in Tarsus (in modern Turkey), which was outside Palestine. He had mingled with Gentiles in the past.

Yes but Peter was also in the fishing industry and markets and trade.
Not just a go for a stroll on sunday morn and put your worm on the hook and hope it bites.
Lots of things going on.. like I say, it's not what Hollywood portrays.
It was an Industry.. Peter left of being a helper/disciple, and went fishing...
Jesus walking down the beach... Yo Peter! What's up??
Peter dove in head first, naked as a jaybird..
He went back to the industry .. making money, not catching fish.

Balance the scales...
Everything has to be weighed, the good and the bad.
Can't turn a blind eye just because something doesn't look good.
You have to dig inside the motives.. the hearts.. and while you do that, you get to see inside your own.
Would I do that? Have I done that?
In the end, it's not about them.. it's about yourself.

Hugs

 

[Philip James]

I will call this Paul's sevenfold rebuke of Peters hypocrisy and beak it down with scripture not my opinion.

Paul's words to Peter were as follows:

1) I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
2)he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
3) The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy,
4) so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
5)they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel
6)You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew
7)you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs

You can read the story in Galatians 2.

And please don't blame me for this blame God, Paul and Peter since God included in His word and Paul confronted Peter.

BTW- if Peter an Apostle could not reach a sinless state post indwelling of the Holy Spirit what on earth makes you think you are above Peter in reaching sinlessness ?

hope this helps !!!

Whats your point?

All of us are guilty of sin.

Peter, to his credit, accepted the rebuke from his brother.

Too many people, not willing, to serve the least of their brethren..

Peace be with you!

 

[Philip James]

Yes but Peter was also in the fishing industry and markets and trade.

And Jesus speaks to the crowds from Peter's boat...

Peace be with you!

 

[Ziggy]

Luk 5:1 And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Gennesaret,
Luk 5:2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets.
Luk 5:3 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon's, and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the ship.

Looks like the shore was getting crowded.

Peace to you as well Brother
Hugs

 

[justbyfaith]

Peter dove in head first, naked as a jaybird..

Actually, he did not have on his outer garment before he jumped into the water, putting it on immediately before doing so.

 

[Ziggy]

I know we are all adults in the room.

There is a folly in much digging. The deeper you go the farther from faith you fall.

Listen..
Your going to doubt things, your going to find conflicts. Your going to dig so deep everything looks like a conspiracy.
And in some cases it is.
Your going to find similaries in other religions and other cultures. And you will question, which came first the chicken or the egg.
You will ecperience all of these things the deeper you go into the pit of hell.
The world has made it that way, to cause you to doubt.

Listen..
Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

God is simplicity. God is not convoluted scientific philisophical choas.

God says: I love you. I want you to Love me.
God says: Trust me.

No matter where your road may lead you.. (and they can get pretty dark, and dangerous.. in your mind)
Remember.. God Loves You. You can Trust Him.
Let everything else do what it has to do. You have to take this road.. go
you feel led down that road.. go.

No Matter where you end up.. End up with God.

Hugs

 

[Taken]

I will call this Paul's sevenfold rebuke of Peters hypocrisy and beak it down with scripture not my opinion.

Your opinion, is revealed...
"You Declared Peter guilty of Sin"
"You Declared Peter's Sin was Peter's hyprocrisy against Paul".

Paul's words to Peter were as follows:

No.
Not Paul's words. Your opinions, in your words.

I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
2)he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
3) The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy,
4) so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
5)they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel
6)You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew
7)you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs
You can read the story in Galatians 2.

And please don't blame me for this blame God, Paul and Peter since God included in His word and Paul confronted Peter.

Very Strange. Why would anyone Blame God....For Peter's Acts, Paul's Acts, or your opinions?

BTW- if Peter an Apostle could not reach a sinless state post indwelling of the Holy Spirit what on earth makes you think you are above Peter in reaching sinlessness ?

BTW...why are YOU making silly claims of "SINLESS" for other people then questioning what you claim?

BTW...you forgot to Scripturally show, one man rebuking another man IS a Sin.

?

 

[justbyfaith]

BTW...you forgot to Scripturally show, one man rebuking another man IS a Sin.

No; it is obedience (2 Timothy 4:2).

 

[Taken]

No; it is obedience (2 Timothy 4:2).

Uh...I don't require a Correction.
It was the OP who declared rebuke a Sin, that I challenged!

 

[justbyfaith]

Uh...I don't require a Correction.
It was the OP who declared rebuke a Sin, that I challenged!

Liked that....but wait....where in the OP did the OP say that rebuking is a sin?

 

[Taken]

Liked that....but wait....where in the OP did the OP say that rebuking is a sin?

It's I his fist post.
His preface is Peter rebuked Paul.
Peter should not have rebuked Paul, since Peter had done the same things.
Thus Peter committed hyprocrisy.
More to the point it was a combination of hypocritical rebuking the OP was claiming is a sin.
Then he goes off on a tangent...about Peter's fail of perfection and Some unknown person claiming sinlessness, adding Peter was not SINLESS, so how could anyone else be SINLESS.

The whole rant is twisted from the get go.

Rebuking between men is not a sin.
Hypocrisy between men is not a sin.
No man is sinless.
Sin is Against God.
Only God forgives Sin.
God makes men perfected, not perfect.

Glory to God,
Taken