9:30
Yes. This this is what we technically call justification by grace grace through faith and not by the works of the law. So that's that's obviously a key theme in Galatians. So we're
9:40
certainly within context here. All right. So truth of the gospel,
10:00
faith, not by the works of the law. And I put works of the law in quotation marks because Paul uses it that phrase
10:14
um in a in a unique way. Some some very I think uh too simplistically say that Judaism taught
10:24
that you're saved by obeying the law. And as we've been seeing hopefully on Thursday night, that's that was never Judaism. that the law was given to
10:34
Israel after its deliverance, not before. And they were never made a condition of salvation, but rather an emblem of it and a continuation of it.
10:45
And so the Martin Luther kind of led the way with the reformation in kind of guiding our thoughts toward uh concluding that Judaism was a
10:56
worksoriented religion. worksoriented religion. um when in fact it it was not and it was not even in Jesus's time. Um true the Pharisees kind of made a big deal of all
11:07
the different points of the ordinances and statutes, but when Paul uses the term works of the law, he uses it as a technical term and
11:19
I there is disagreement as to what exactly he means. Um, I agree with those who translate or interpret this as the the things of the law that
11:33
marked out Jews as the people of God. They were they were markers. They were things that were to be observed. But within the context of Paul's usage of
11:48
this phrase, they tend to refer to three things. It's a Sabbath. Well, circumcision of course is first.
12:15
Sabbath. Now, again, there is disagreement. Yes.
12:27
Yes, I do think that that is um what he means there in in a general sense because he uses that phrase in Romans but mostly in Galatians pursuing a law of righteousness they they they did
12:38
not catch or or capture the righteousness of God. That law of righteousness became righteousness became ethnosentric. what what happened in Judaism under the second temple uh
12:50
really from the time of the exile on two things one good one bad the first one was they pretty much were cured of idolatry at least in the material form
13:00
of having physical idols they they didn't really do that after the Babylonian exile that that's the good thing the bad thing was they became incredibly ethnosentric in their view of of God's
13:13
grace and they believed that to become become part of God's people, you had to become a Jew, which was technically true, but they were missing the point.
13:24
These things did in fact mark the Jews off from the rest of the world. And they were they were given to Israel for that purpose. But now that Israel's Messiah
13:37
has come, that purpose has been fulfilled. And to go back to these is not just an option. It is a perversion or a or or a
13:49
um bending or a corruption of the truth of the of the gospel. That make sense? So any
14:00
ethnosentricity within the the gospel is a corruption.
14:32
Yeah, we can go back to Romans 3 where Paul shuts up both Jew and Gentile under the law and says that all have fallen short of the the glory of God.
14:50
And he does that in Yeah, he does that in uh Galatians 2 as well when he goes on talking to Peter. He says, "If you being a Jew live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like the
15:02
Jews?" We are, this is kind of an interesting enigmatic phrase, we are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles. Now, I think there he's he's he's kind of doing that a
15:13
little bit tongue and cheek, you know, that that we Jews, he does that in Romans 2 as well when he says, you know, you you're a Jew, you're a teacher of the law, you're the corrector of people.
15:23
Uh do you not all, you know, you say do not steal, do do you not also steal? Um and here I think he's doing the same thing. We we're not sinners from among the Gentiles. Nevertheless, knowing that
15:35
a man is not justified by the works of the law, but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we, and this is a a very ironic way he's putting it, even we have
15:46
believed in Christ Jesus that we may we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law since by the works of the law shall no flesh be
15:57
justified. So he he's basically saying no even we Jews we don't have any upper hand we don't have any advantage even we have
16:07
believed in Christ Jesus for justification we you know so he's saying don't don't think that this is just something for the Gentiles is how they can get in no even we have to realize
16:19
that no man is justified by the works of the law these things had a purpose these things were markers of separation as we've seen in Leviticus. But when that
16:30
purpose has been fulfilled and that which was foreshadowed has come, then these things have to go away.
17:00
Exactly. And and that I think is one of the fundamental mistakes of dispensationalism because what they have done is they've associated the law with the Jews and the promise with the church. But Paul does something. I appreciate you mentioning this. So here
17:11
we are, if we're looking at the chronology, here we are at the church. And then here's Israel. Okay. Um but here's Abraham who all Israel claimed to be
17:23
their father. their father. And and of course, Israel means Moses, right? And Moses means the law. So what does Paul do? He's in Galatians. He
17:37
goes, "No." He jumps right over Moses 4. 420 years. Yeah. And then he says, "The law does not abregate the promise." So I mean, he blows
17:49
dispensation out of the water with that passage right there that you you got it all wrong. We're we're all as he says this is parallel to Romans when he says all who are in faith are children are seed are the seed of Abraham. So yeah,
18:02
it's it's like this is the truth of the gospel and when you go back into this sort of thing which is what was going on. Now this of course the circumcision
18:12
was a big issue. Um but this event um at um at Antioch when Peter withdrew that was that was a dietary law thing. You don't
18:25
even eat with Gentiles because even if they serve clean food, it was not prepared in a clean manner. And and so you as a Jew, you didn't even enter the
18:36
house of a Gentile, much less sit down at the table with them. So they they're going back into the shadows. And and Paul says, "No, you do that and you're you're not just making a
18:50
uh let me put it back to the word that we use with regard to Romans 14. This is not adora. This this is not matters indifferent and and I think we can
19:00
follow. It's really hard for us to determine what is and what isn't important except the patterns that we see in the New Testament. I don't I don't know that we
19:12
have any direct revelation to be able to determine what what is adapora. We can we can agree to disagree and what is
19:24
fundamental. Certainly when we see something in scripture that is fundamental and Paul reacts in this way we can't then later on make it
19:34
aora we can't later on say well no it's really not that important if you're not comfortable eating with people of other socioeconomic level or ethnicity you
19:46
know that that's okay and they have their table and and we have our table and and we pray for one another and and everything's okay. Now, I say that
19:56
facitiously, but you will not believe how often that has happened in the church over the last 2,000 years and in Christian homes or professing Christian homes where where we have set up uh
20:10
barriers among barriers among ourselves and see no problem with it. But Paul says, you're not being straightforward about the truth of the gospel. Which again, that is a a
20:23
positive way of saying you're corrupting the gospel. You're perverting the gospel. He's he's saying it, you know,
20:34
sometimes he says it that way to Peter. He says, "No, you're just you're not being straightforward here, Peter. You're not being you're not you're not being truthful about the truth of the gospel." But the the the um the upshot
20:46
of that is that you're being false, which means you're corrupting the truth of the gospel. And and that's really heavy stuff. He he's basically
21:00
um well again up in verse 11, he he says Peter stood Peter stood condemned. Now I don't think that means that Peter lost his salvation. That's
21:10
not the point. What the point is is that Peter was guilty of this very serious offense and Paul was quick to point it
21:20
out. Okay. So, um this is this is all very accurate. Uh so we can conclude
21:50
Now between Jew and Gentile, all have been shut up under sin. All have been brought under the condemnation of sin. And therefore, all
22:00
are redeemed, at least those who are redeemed by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Okay, that's the fundamental
22:25
Well, there's they're they're from James. Paul says nothing more than that they're from James. James is usually interpreted to be the brother of the Lord who was the leader of the council
22:36
in Acts 15 and probably the author of the letter. No doubt a believer. Okay. Um, we know that when Paul and Barnabas
22:49
went up to Jerusalem, there were still a number of Jewish believers who were really struggling with this idea of Gentiles being in the community but not being
22:59
circumcised. That was the whole point of the discussion was that they were not obeying the laws of Moses. They were not being circumcised. They were not observing the Sabbath. They were not
23:10
observing the dietary laws. So the this this was a and that's why I brought in Romans 14. I think these people were believers. Okay, we have no indication
23:21
to think to think otherwise other than what John says in one of his letters when he says they went out from us but they were not of us because if they had been of us they
23:32
would have remained with us. In other words, John was saying, you know, some people are going around saying, "Hey, we're from John, so listen to what we have to say." And John says, "No, they're not from us." But that's in the
23:43
context of the Antichrist and testing the spirits. So those people were doing something even worse than these. Okay? Paul's not very happy with
23:54
these. And I but he wasn't happy with them in Jerusalem either. And yet he doesn't I don't think we can conclude that they were not actually believers. I think the phrase from James means they
24:06
were accepted brethren in the Jerusalem church. And we don't even see that they're doing anything wrong. The one who is at fault is
24:18
Peter. We don't know that they even said, "Peter, come on. Let's not go there. Uh let's let's have our own meal and then we can all meet at church." Okay? We don't know that they even said
24:28
that Peter's the only one that's being brought into the crosshairs in this one.
24:43
doesn't say you're not being straightforward
25:03
s doesn't use as strong as he other times does, right? And again in the same same context he uses the the term mutilate, self mutilation, a very very strong term. So no, he does he does seem to be treating Peter and I would say
25:15
he's treating Peter and James and remember this is also the letter where he talks about them as being the reputed pillars of the church, John and James and Peter. So he's he's showing respect
25:27
to Peter while also condemning him. Um, and I do think we we accept that the men who came down from Jerusalem to Antioch were believers, but they were, as I was
25:39
saying about Romans 14, um, this was not adapora. You know, we we can't get into the place where we simply say that that
25:50
everything that we do is is matters indifferent. There are certain things that aren't. And po and Paul very clearly says here this isn't matters
26:00
indifferent. This is this is fundamental to the truth of the gospel.
26:40
I would agree with that. Yeah. He he's held to a higher account as one who walked with Jesus, who was, I think uh it it's hard to deny that he was at least the first among equals among the
26:50
disciples. He was certainly a leader among the among the apostles. Um plus he had the experience of seeing the Holy Spirit poured out upon the household of of Cornelius. So
27:01
um whether Paul knew that or not, it's still Peter, you ought to know better. and what you do. And I I think Peter is highlighting or Paul is highlighting that because Peter being the the the
27:13
reputed pillar that he is, he's drawing others away, including even Barnabas. Okay. So, you know, I think you're right that Peter's being held to
27:25
a higher a higher standard. And Paul Paul, I don't think, is all that concerned about dealing with those people who came from James. Theoretically, they came down for a
27:36
visit and they're going back and I imagine um Peter was like, "Here's your hat. What's your hurry?" You know, showing them the door. But he he was
27:46
more concerned about this right here. Okay. Now, that means that someone who's who's seems to be mostly concerned with peace and harmony and unity within the body. Um Paul never yielded on truth.
28:02
So peace and harmony and unity did not exist upon any other foundation than the truth of the gospel. And that's consistent throughout his letters. So we can't we can't say okay it's all about
28:13
let's let us all get along. We need to all get along. That's not his approach here. And it's it's not like you know Peter that really offended the Gentiles. None of that
28:25
either. It was you are not being straightforward with the truth of the gospel. Now, that that links, as I said, that links this idea of table fellowship with
28:36
the gospel the gospel itself. And I think you could use the phrase, this is where the rubber meets the road. This is where the truth of what we
28:46
profess is either proven or proven to be lie. That a fair statement?
29:04
elaborate on that. Well, again, if if Peter's not being what what is what do we call someone who's not straightforward about the truth? We call him a liar. Okay, we we know that not being straightforward about the
29:16
truth is a euphemism, right? They are a liar. So, this this is a direct attack upon the gospel.
29:34
um, let me let me see if I can go come at it a different other examples. Our culture is not the same as
29:44
their culture. Um and and our culture in terms of meals is not even remotely like their culture in terms of meals and c and the meal we we talked
29:58
about this at the beginning of this little section. The meal has been a fundamental part of human society forever. But that doesn't mean it has always uh happened the same way. It
30:10
doesn't always happen the same way. So I don't think we can look at table fellowship from Acts 2 verse 42 our kind of our our starting verse in this
30:21
series. I don't think we can say okay we need to all start taking our meals together again. I I think I shared the story about a home many many years ago that we we renovated in the in the
30:33
neighborhood between uh Wade Hampton um and North Pleasantberg. the the the kind of little triangle that that houses a
30:44
university and then there are a whole bunch of homes that are beyond that. And we noticed when we started the renovation that the the kitchen was nothing more than a kitchenet. There was
30:55
no range, no oven, no cooktop. And we were actually working for somebody and I and I asked what what's up with this? Well, everybody had their meals at the university.
31:08
They didn't they didn't eat at home. They had their meals. This was this they didn't continue to do this at the time. Um but that was the way it was back in the day that everybody had their meals
31:19
at the university. This is where we have um uh monasteries and and convents and closters. The idea that the way to get back to the Bible is to do it exactly
31:31
the way they did it. They were breaking bread together day by day. Well, we must take our meals together. I don't think that's the right way to approach the scripture is to try to incorporate the
31:42
cultural meu of what we're reading into our culture. It doesn't tend to work. We might think it's very noble as
31:53
an attempt, but frankly it doesn't work. So what is it about table fellowship that stands as a timeless principle?
32:04
What is it about table fellowship to to go back to this um you know what is the truth of table fellowship? So what what then second question what is the
32:45
That that's what I mean by this is where the rubber meets the road. This is where our profession Peter's profession is proven to be at least in this instance
33:10
And and what will happen to the children of the kingdom? They will be cast out.
33:40
Okay. Oops. I can't get it right. Got to get it
33:52
right. Where do we find true DEI in the church of Jesus Christ? Now again don't take that too far because we've we've spent many times talking about the fact that even within
34:04
equality there is there is hierarchy within a marriage there's a essential unity between the husband and the wife and yet there's an economic structure
34:14
that God has ordained as he has in the godhead within the church and this is where Paul's going he won't get there until chapter 3 verse 28 okay but he's
34:25
he's heading in direction um that the truth of the gospel is that of a new humanity. We've we've mentioned this
34:36
many many times, but the truth of the gospel is a new creation with a
34:47
new Adam and in him a a new humanity. The reason that Peter calls us resident
34:58
aliens is because that is what we are as believers. We are we are no longer uh relatives of the rest of the human
35:08
race. We we can no longer trace our lineage to Adam in any other way than biologically. But spiritually that connection has been broken because we
35:20
died with Christ. But we're regenerated. We are born again in Christ. Which means our true heritage, our true 23 and me is not back to Adam,
35:34
but it's back to Christ. So we're we're not just resident aliens like the Jews were because they believed in one God instead of many and they had these strange practices and
35:47
they were kind of isolated and insulated and a little offensive. That's not why we're resident aliens. We're resident aliens because we are we don't belong to
35:59
this race this race anymore. We're being taken out of that race into a new human race by the
36:09
regenerative powers by being born again. Does Does that make sense? Anybody react to that? It's rather radical, but I think it's awfully biblical.
36:28
Right. Right. Except they, you know, as we should see from their scriptures, they could have seen it coming. And even even here, they could have seen that in your
36:39
seed all the nations will be blessed. You know, they they they should have always seen that there was some universal element of what God was doing through them that they missed pretty
37:05
[Music] at the same time, They the equality and yet the differences
37:16
still exist side by side just as the the new creation in Christ now exists within the old creation in Adam.
37:26
So that kind of juxtaposition of the new it it's not you you're all of a sudden taken out into this new dimension where everything is fine. No, you're still and and this is the struggle of the gospel.
37:38
And this is why that that that's why I think Paul calls the church the pillar and foundation of the truth in the
37:55
going back to your question about what is the is the connection I connection I guess looking at how they would have
38:10
together whether someone's in the family or out of the family yes won't sit won't sit down Right.
38:40
Yes. In fact, there's a there's an implicit claim that they are not Lauren. Right.
39:03
And just as with Israel, what they were to do was because of who they were, not the other way around. what we are still supposed to do the things that we're commanded, of
39:13
course, but we do them not in order to be, but because we be. It's it that's an incredibly important distinction. It's a cart and
39:24
the horse type of thing that that you are you do what you do because you are who you are. That's what that's what u Mark's been preaching from Peter is that be who you are. And and this is a this
39:36
is perhaps the most intimate and common manifestation of that in the old world. It still is in the old world. Not so much. We talked about this at the
39:47
beginning, you know, that that we're we're struggling to hold together family dinner, right? So we we've done gone a long way to removing the cultural
39:57
context of the meal from our modern American culture. So it makes it even harder to understand what we're reading. But we can at least understand that there are cultures in the world today
40:08
where if you're not invited to the table, that that is a powerful statement of you're on the outside. I just think that our culture once again the
40:20
opposite. encouraged to sit down with sit down with the person who is your ranked enemy or opposite and well
40:46
sitt of you will sit with yeah it that the sitting down is only the outward manifestation of an inward judgement That's all in in table fellowship. The sitting down was the outward manifestation of your acceptance or
40:58
rejection of that other person. You either sit down with them at the table or you will not. And that remains in many cultures even today.
41:29
You stay in your church, right? That's actually where I'm headed just to show the history of table fellowship. A
41:49
rec. Everybody touches everything. Yeah. Your fingers, their fingers. So you sit down and get
42:16
it's very intimate. Yes. And Italian Italian meals were that way as well. Now, it wasn't quite I mean it but it was just a pile of food on at the table and everybody sitting around it helping
42:26
themselves sharing with others. Um and if if you you know if you asked for a piece of bread they wouldn't send you the basket. They'd take out a piece of bread and hand it down to you or throw
42:37
it at you depending on how far away. Um, so it was, you know, that was something that I remember growing up is the difference between the meals on the German side of my family and the meals
42:48
on the Italian side. Okay. And and um the Mediterranean area is still a lot like that. They they've preserved the centrality and the dynamics of the meal.
43:00
So it's not just sitting down. No, it's more as more as being friends.
43:11
It's not just sitting together and eating. It's intimacy. Yeah. It's it's intimacy. It's really recognizing the other as as your equal and as your brother. Um and and that still remains
43:23
even in our culture. So if we bring this back to our culture in the Greco Roman world, you never ever ever had men with women.
43:41
Never. They took their meal separately. Okay. You also never ever ever had ever had servants eating with their masters. So it wasn't just Jews and
43:52
Greeks in this culture. There were so much segregation at the meal. The women would have their meal. They might have it at
44:02
the same time, but it'd be in a different room. different room. The servants would not have their meal at the same time. It would be afterward in a different room. Okay? In the medieval ages, you had the same
44:13
situation. The men and the women, the the nobles at least, would would eat together, but then afterward, the trenchers would be put out. They they didn't have plates, as it were. They
44:25
they had bread that served as their plate, and then those and then would soap up all the stuff. And then those trenches were taken out to the poor. The
44:35
poor weren't invited into the hall. You know that there. And then um Abigail mentioned segregation during uh during the antibbellum period. Um whites white
44:48
um preachers and and even white slave owners um advocated the evangelism of the slave, but they had their own services.
45:00
And that would go on through the Jim Crow era. And honestly, it's pretty much gone on into our era that that you know the the churches in our country are
45:14
largely segregated. Maybe not. I don't I don't know that it's an active thing and I don't know there's an active thing that can fix it. But there is something within the church that still retains
45:25
this this this this discrimination between ethnicity or skin color or socioeconomic level. Um James
45:35
talks about it, doesn't he? You know that when a rich man comes in, you you give him the high, you know, a poor man comes in, you go sit over there on the floor. And he says all of that is what? It's sin. So James and Paul are in lock
45:49
step here. So it was going on then, it was going on in a culture where it was going on and it has continued to go on ever go on ever since and I think it still does
46:00
still does today. And so fundamentally what Paul is saying here saying here uh culminates in chapter 3 28 and I
46:10
firmly believe that this this whole this this comment that is sadly very often misunderstood. He says, "There is ne neither Jew nor Greek. There is neither slave nor free
46:22
man. There is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus." I think the context is right here. I think the context is table
46:32
fellowship. And I think we need to understand as Paul teaches elsewhere, he's not teaching equality between the slave and the
46:43
master. You know, he's not saying slave, you're no longer the slave and master, you can't boss him around. No, he's not te saying that there's no there's now
46:53
equality between the husband and the wife that that neither of them is in charge only, you know, it's it's a shared teamwork type of thing. No, all of those
47:04
of those um economic relationships remain but essentially as to their fundamental being which means how they
47:14
perceive one perceive one another all such distinctions have been obliterated in obliterated in Christ. Okay. So we we're not slaves are
47:25
not even to demand their freedom. Paul says to the Corinthians, "Husbands are to again, they're supposed to to love and guard over their wives. Their wives are supposed to submit to their
47:36
husbands. And yet there is no distinction, essential distinction between the husband and the wife, between the slave and the master. It is all we're all one in
47:47
Christ." And table fellowship is what shows that. shows that. So, in terms of application, and we're going to, Lord willing, close up next week with uh with the marriage feast of
47:59
the lamb, which is like the the absolute pinnacle of table fellowship. And, you know, I think we all realize that we're
48:09
not all going to look alike. I don't know what was going to happen, but I I really don't think that we're going to all show up at that table. Aryan, blonde hair, blue eyes, white,
48:20
you know, I don't think so. I I don't, you know, obviously we can't know, but I I don't think we're it's going to be what any of us expect or at least it
48:32
won't be what any of us have grown accustomed to in our own relationships. So, um this is where I think, you know, that
49:08
conclusion that that to me is the whole summary of the teaching of what Peter did wrong in Antioch. Well, let's close in prayer. Father, we do pray that you would continue to teach us from your word and by your spirit and help us to
49:20
learn this lesson. Help us to learn the truth of the gospel that that in Christ there is no there is no distinction. all of the distinctions that we are familiar with and that we make have been
49:32
obliterated in Christ and that while we maintain the hierarchy of our position as you have providentially ordained, we must realize that there is no essential
49:44
dis difference and we must treat one another with that realization in order to walk according to the truth of the gospel. We ask that you would teach us these things and continue to teach us
