Functional Gospel-Centeredness

If you’ve visited my blog several times, you have probably observed a strong emphasis upon the gospel. The primary objective for my blog is to focus weekly on the centrality of the gospel in all of life. Behind almost every post of mine is this conviction, as Tim Keller puts it, the gospel is not just the A-B-C’s of the Christian life but the A to Z of the Christian life. If I were asked to choose what I believed was the text behind this conviction, I would choose Galatians 2:11-16. So what I wish to do is unpack this text’s teaching concerning the centrality of the gospel for all of life (I am profoundly indebted to Tim Keller’s exposition of this text in his article entitled, “The Centrality of the Gospel.” You can find it in the article section of the far right column of my blog.)

The Confrontation

At the center of this gospel-centered text is a confrontation where the apostle Peter is confronted by the apostle Paul. Some might see two “heavy weight” Christians squaring off in this text, a battle of egos. But what we do not have in this confrontation is play for power. Rather, what is put on display here is a Christian’s passion for the gospel and gospel-centered living. Paul was keenly aware that the gospel and gospel-centered living was at stake here, primarily because of choices Peter had made.

Gospel Identity

Have you ever wondered how it was that Paul, a relative newcomer to the rank of Apostle, found the courage to confront Peter who was the most eminent Jerusalem apostle? After all, Paul was still persecuting the church when Peter was preaching powerful gospel-centered sermons. How was it that Paul was able to locate the necessary courage to do what he believed was the right thing to do, namely, confront a man who had been so powerfully used of God in the building of the church?

I think we can find an answer to that question if we thoughtfully consider the first several verses of chapter 2. Paul makes a curious statement four times in verses 2-9. In verse 2, Paul says that he went to Jerusalem to set the gospel before “those who seemed influential.” Who were these seemingly influential men? They were at least Peter, James, and John (verse 9). Again, in verse 6, Paul refers to “those who seemed to be influential” adding, “what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality.” Verse 6 then ends with these words, “Those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me.” Finally, in verse 9, Paul refers specifically to Peter, James, and John as those “who seemed to be pillars.”

Why does Paul repeatedly refer to Jerusalem apostles as “those who seemed influential”? We find the answer in verse 6.

“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” (Galatians 2:6).

What point is Paul making when he says, “what they were makes no different to me; God shows no partiality”? Paul realized that God does not choose or accept anybody on the basis of external advantages such as apostleship. As great of an honor being an apostle was, it was not the basis for the reception of God’s favor. Paul knew that with regard to favor God shows no partiality to those of “superior” reputation. Paul’s sense of identity was not threatened by potentially being positioned against those of great reputation. Paul was a man whose sense of identity was not dependent upon any man or religious institution. His sense of identity was not derailed or disturbed because he did not fear being thought poorly of by “those who seem to be influential.” When Paul went to Jerusalem there was the potential that “those who seemed to be influential” in the church would not take his side. This would have meant that “those who seemed to be pillars” disapproved of Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles. But Paul’s sense of identity was unflappable in the face of this potentiality.

It is important to note that Paul’s main concern in his Jerusalem visit was not so much his personal identity as it was the ongoing fruitfulness of the Gospel. Consider verses 4 and 5.

“Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery— [5] to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you” (Galatians 2:4-5).

Paul’s primary concern was that the truth of the gospel might be preserved among the Gentiles. He understood that if the apostles in Jerusalem did not grant full acceptance to an uncircumcised Gentile, the entire church and even the subsequent history of the Christian church would be brought into slavery. Humanly speaking Paul knew that there was the possibility that the church would be condemned to bondage and barrenness if the Jerusalem apostles caved in to the Judaizers. So Paul demonstrated enormous courage here.

How was Paul able to demonstrate so much courage before those seemed influential? I believe the answer is found in verse 5. Note the italicized words.

“To them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you” (Galatians 2:5).

Only one thing really mattered to Paul, namely, “the truth of the gospel.” He knew that nothing was as important as the Gospel. It alone was “the power of God unto salvation” (Romans 1:16). It was the only way of life and blessing and peace! Paul knew that without it there was not only no freedom but no church. So what is the truth of the gospel that Paul fought to preserve at the risk of his own reputation? In short, it was the truth that God fully accepts all, whether Jew or Gentile, through faith in Christ alone. Paul was able to lay everything on the line, to risk his acceptance among men because of the truth of the gospel. He knew that he already enjoyed the full acceptance of the Father. He was able to face those who seemed influential because he was convinced that nothing would or could put his acceptance before God in jeopardy. Paul was a man who found his identity not in the opinions of men but in the full acceptance of God alone through faith alone. So at the very center of Paul’s confrontation of Peter was the gospel. It was both the reason he confronted and the power of his confrontation.

Gospel Proof

Galatians 2:11-16 gives us clear evidence that Paul did not derive his sense of identity from those who seemed influential. In verse 11, Paul says, “When [Peter] came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.” One significant piece of evidence that testified to the fact that Paul did not derive his sense of identity from men was that he confronted a very important and powerful man. Confrontation is a really tough test! I don’t think there is anything quite like having to confront someone else especially when they are influential that reveals from where we really derive our sense of identity. Paul definitely passed the test here. His sense of identity was not shaken even in a most difficult circumstance.

Confrontation is a great revealer of where a person locates his identity. If you are an individual who finds your identity in the opinions of others, you will find it difficult to confront especially when it involves a person of influence. I wonder if one main reason so little Christian confrontation takes place in the church is that so many believers locate their identity functionally in man rather than in Christ. Galatians 2 should give us hope that it is possible to functionally derive our sense of identity from Christ rather than in man.

The Problem

What was the occasion for Paul’s confrontation of Peter? We find out in verse 12. Notice first, what it was Peter stopped doing; and second, why it was that Peter stopped doing it.

“[Because] 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” (Galatians 2:12).

First, what did Peter stop doing? He stopped enjoying table fellowship with the Gentiles. Second, why did he stop this? Because he feared the circumcision party. Now, what exactly was Peter’s struggle here? Before we answer that question, let’s look at why it was that Peter originally began eating with the Gentiles in the first place. In Acts 11, we read:

“Now the apostles and the brothers who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him, saying, ‘You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.’ But Peter began and explained it to them in order: ‘I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision, something like a great sheet descending, being let down from heaven by its four corners, and it came down to me. Looking at it closely, I observed animals and beasts of prey and reptiles and birds of the air. And I heard a voice saying to me, 'Rise, Peter; kill and eat.' But I said, 'By no means, Lord; for nothing common or unclean has ever entered my mouth.' But the voice answered a second time from heaven, 'What God has made clean, do not call common.' This happened three times, and all was drawn up again into heaven” (Acts 11:1-11).

Peter’s struggle at that time was that his conscience was still bound to the ceremonial law, that is, to a series of extensive regulations that God’s people had to follow in order to be found acceptable in the worship. It was God’s way of teaching His people that sinful people cannot go into the presence of God without cleansing. Thus, God was seeking to reeducate Peter’s conscience. “Peter, what God has made clean, do not call common.” This reeducating of Peter’s conscience is what freed him to eat with the Gentiles. Later on in Acts he shares the content of the theological education he received from God back in Joppa.

“And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, ‘Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed [i.e. made clean] their hearts by faith’” (Acts 15:7-9).

What Peter came to realize was that it is through Christ alone that all believers are “made clean” and acceptable to God, because now it is Christ who makes us “holy and blameless and above reproach before him” (Colossians 1:22) and “without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that [we] might be holy and without blemish” (Ephesians 5:27). So why did Peter draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles? Paul says that it was because Peter feared the circumcision party (Galatians 2:12). He drew back out of fear. He did not draw back out of a firmly held conviction but out of fear. Peter fell into the trap of trying to derive his sense of identity from those who seemed influential. His “need” for a sense of identity from those who were seemed influential beat out what he knew concerning the truth of the gospel. What was worse was that he took others with him. Verse 13 states that “the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with [Peter], so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.”

One of the things we learn here is that whenever believers make a decision based upon the fear of man they are being hypocritical because they are betraying “the truth of the gospel.” Paul says that Peter’s “conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel” (Galatians 2:14). We believers are hypocritical whenever our conduct is not in step with the truth of the gospel. Whenever we make a decision based upon the fear of man we are not walking in line with the doctrine of justification by faith alone which is “the truth of the gospel.”

Galatians 2 teaches us that the gospel sends out lines into all of life—justification-by-faith lines—and it is the responsibility of believers both to know how those lines manifest themselves and walk them. When Peter and the other Jews drew back from the Gentiles they were not walking in line the doctrine of justification by faith. So Paul confronts him to the face because he stood guilty of not believing the gospel functionally. Peter was not guilty of not believing the gospel theologically. He would have been quick to affirm the doctrine of justification by faith theologically. His problem was that in that situation he failed to believe it functionally, that is, he failed to walk in line with the truth of the gospel.

Peter’s failure manifested itself in two ways. First, it manifested itself by his withdrawal from table fellowship with the Gentiles. How was it manifested in this way? Because his behavior indicated that faith in Christ is not enough for Christian fellowship. Peter’s behavior essentially said that if Christian fellowship is to be extended, it is to be extended not just on the basis of faith in Christ but also on the basis of some other external religious marker. In other words, Peter’s actions said that in order for Gentiles to be accepted by the Jews into fellowship they had to believe in Christ and be circumcised. His withdrawal from fellowship with Gentiles was essentially a denial of the doctrine of justification by faith. Peter would not have denied justification by faith theologically, but his behavior showed that he denied it functionally.

Lest we think that the church today does not functionally deny the gospel consider this brief example. Many churches today that are conservative musically will refuse to fellowship with churches that utilize drums and electric guitars. Is not this a failure to believe the gospel functionally? Probably all of these conservative churches would affirm the doctrine of justification by faith theologically. But Galatians 2 teaches that it is not enough to affirm the truth of the gospel doctrinally. We must also affirm it functionally. Could we not conclude that the failure of conservative churches to do so is hypocritical due to the failure to walk in line with the truth of the gospel?

Second, Peter’s failure manifested itself by caring too much about man’s opinion. Paul says that Peter withdrew from the Gentiles because he feared the circumcision party. The doctrine of justification by faith means that the believer’s identity is found in Christ and not anything else. But when a believer “forgets” that reality, that is, when the reality of being accepted by God through faith in Christ alone ceases to be central to his thinking and believing, he will try to locate his identity in something or someone else. This is what happened to Peter. In his spiritual forgetfulness, he began locating his identity in the acceptance of those who seemed influential. It seems to me that the fear of man is essentially a justification by faith issue. Could the reason the fear of man is such a problem for us today be because the doctrine of justification by faith is not central to our consciousness? Could the reason the fear of man is such a stumbling block for Christians today be because we do not begin each day standing strong on the reality that we are fully accepted by God in Christ? Galatians 2 teaches that whenever we fall to the fear of man we are not walking in line with the truth of the gospel.

So, what did Paul do when he saw Peter’s failure? He confronted him with the gospel and this is what we must do with ourselves everyday. If we are not daily confronting ourselves and being confronted with the truth of the gospel, we will quickly fall out of line with the gospel.

The Solution

The content of Paul’s verbal confrontation is found in Galatians 2:15-16. Paul said to Peter:

“We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified” (Galatians 2:15-16).

Interpretation Issue

If we are to properly understand these verses we must understand what Paul means by “Gentile sinners.” Paul, speaking to Peter says, “We ourselves (you and me, Peter) are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners.” Is Paul saying that as Jews Peter and he are not sinners? No, Paul is not using the term “sinners” in this way. Paul makes it clear elsewhere that both Jews and Gentiles are sinners.

“What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin” (Romans 3:9).

What we need to keep in mind in Galatians 2:15-16 is that Paul is making a contrast between Jews and Gentiles in the context of a discussion on the ceremonial law. Gentiles were considered “sinners”, as Paul uses the term in verse 15, because as non-Jews they habitually neglected observing the ceremonial law. Jews, on the other hand, did not neglect it because it was specifically given to them by God. It is within this context that Paul says to Peter, “We ourselves are Jews by birth and not those who from birth neglect the ceremonial law, namely, the Gentiles; yet though we were not born as ceremonial law-neglecters we know that a person is not justified by observing the ceremonial law but through faith in Jesus Christ alone, so we also (like Gentile believers) have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the ceremonial law, because by works of law no one will be justified” (my paraphrase).

In confronting Peter, Paul says, “Peter, you know that we are not found acceptable to God by keeping any part of the law. You know that we are found acceptable to God through faith in Christ alone. So whether you are a law-keeping Jew by birth or a law-neglecting Gentile by birth, you are justified the same way, namely, through faith in Christ.”

Application Focus

What Paul is seeking to drive in to Peter’s consciousness is this, “Peter, if you are already justified in God’s eyes, why do you need to be justified in man’s?” You see this was Peter’s problem. When he drew back from the Gentiles, he was seeking to justify himself in the eyes of the circumcision group. Peter had “forgotten” that God loved and had fully accepted him. Peter’s justification before God was not functionally central to his thinking and believing.

Now does that mean that after hearing Paul’s’ words, Peter said, “Oh, yea! That’s right! God has fully accepted me! How in the world did I forget about that?” No, remember, Peter did not forget about God’s acceptance in that he had no recollection of it. We are not talking about the difference between having something in your head and not having something in your head. No, Peter had forgotten that we are justified through faith in Christ alone in that he was not feeling the reality of it. He knew the reality of it, but he wasn’t “feeling” it.

As I see it, there are really two reasons for Paul’s confrontation of Peter. First, the gospel was at stake. The Apostle Peter’s functional denial of the gospel led many others astray (Galatians 2:13). His failure to walk in line with the truth of the gospel was in direct opposition to the Christian mission (Matthew 28:18-20). So Paul confronted Peter to set things right.

Second, Paul was not just concerned with the advancement of the gospel in the world. He was also concerned for Peter himself. Paul confronted Peter in order that he might feel the reality of the gospel again. He essentially did Hebrews 11:24 on him.

“And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works.”

In the context of Hebrews 10, “to stir up” means to provoke others unto love and good works by encouraging them with the truth of the Gospel. Hebrews 10 (as well as the entire book) is jammed full of gospel truth. For example, verse 10 says that believers have been “sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Verse 12 says that “when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.” Verse 14 says that “by a single offering” Christ “has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” If we started back in chapter one, we could list verse after verse of gospel truth.

What was the writer of Hebrews trying to accomplish with all of this gospel truth? He was seeking to stir them up unto love and good works. Hebrews 10:24-25 is a call for them to do that very same thing with one another. This kind of stirring up always aims at the heart where we are prone to forget the gospel, that is, where we are prone not to “feel” the reality of the gospel’s truth. It doesn’t take long for this to happen. That’s why Hebrews 3:12-13 says (note the italicized words):

“Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”

What must we do in order to be people who walk in line with the gospel every day? First, we must think through the implications of the gospel for every area of life. How should the truth of the gospel, that we are accepted by God through faith in Christ alone, influence relationships between single men and women? What kind of individuals should you be willing to consider as marriage partner? Should you only first consider those who are externally beautiful or handsome? These are the kinds of questions Christians need to be asking. Does the truth of the gospel have implications for relationships between single men and women? Absolutely. So if we are to be a people who walk in line with the truth of the gospel, we must think out it’s implications for every area of life. Why? Because the gospel sends out lines of implication into every area of life (see diagram below).

Second, we must learn to be our own Paul’s. We must learn to preach the truth of the Gospel to ourselves everyday. Otherwise we quickly forget and not feel its truth in our hearts. So learn to be your own Paul.

Third, we must have people in our lives that are Paul’s for us. Peter needed a Paul and so do we. Find a few Paul’s and ask them to regularly (everyday if possible) preach the truth of the Gospel to you applying it to your life situation. This is one reason why we gather as the people of God (Heb. 10:25). The church gathers together to be Paul’s for each other in order that we might be stirred up unto love and good works not forgetting the gospel.

Functional Gospel-Centeredness