Peter and Paul in Acts: A Comparison of Their Ministries: A Study in New Testament Apostolic Ministry

---

And so in Acts 10, God orchestrated the visions of Cornelius and Peter, compelling Peter to go to the house of this Gentile where he then preached the gospel. God gave Cornelius and those gathered there faith to believe and baptized them with His Spirit, just as He had done with the Jews in Jerusalem at Pentecost see Acts Peter could do nothing else than to baptize them with water Acts How dare Peter preach to the Gentiles and share salvation with them!

He was summarily called on the carpet to explain his actions. They acknowledged with some measure of surprise that God was actually saving Gentiles as well as Jews. This should not have come to them as new revelation. As Paul will demonstrate in Romans , the Old Testament clearly foretold this, and so did our Lord.

What else could our Lord have meant by these words:. The surprise of the Jerusalem Jewish saints is more an indication of their racial and religious biases than of genuine ignorance. This mentality carried over into the church so that even Christian Jews if we dare use such an expression felt a kind of smug superiority to Gentile believers. But even when they reluctantly acknowledged the truth, only a handful of unknown Hellenistic Jews actually shared their faith with Gentiles Acts Only after Gentile saints came to faith no thanks to the Jerusalem Jews and even the apostles, save Peter did the apostles respond by sending Barnabas to Antioch Acts It was from the Gentile church of Antioch and not Jerusalem that world-wide evangelism was purposefully begun Acts The Spirit of God spoke to and through the leaders of the church at Antioch, and Barnabas and Paul were sent out Acts It was only as a result of the rejection of the gospel by the Jews that Paul and Barnabas focused their attention on Gentile evangelism Acts The salvation of many Gentiles brought about a problem so serious that the Jewish leaders of the Jerusalem church, which included both the apostles and the elders, could not ignore it.

Some unbelieving Jews opposed the preaching of the gospel; others sought to distort the gospel by insisting that Gentile converts be forced to submit to the Law of Moses as indicated by circumcision.

At the end of their first missionary journey while Paul and Barnabas were in Antioch, some Jews came down from Judea insisting the only way a Gentile could be saved was to convert to Judaism, as well as to trust in Christ. They insisted the only way a Gentile could enter into the blessings of the kingdom of God was to become a Jew, that is, a Jewish proselyte. Gentile saints were therefore not required to be circumcised nor to keep the Law.

The only requirements of the Gentile believers were these:. It is most interesting to note who played the dominant role as this decision was reached. His argument is allotted five verses by Luke. James spoke last, and he is the one who proposes the verdict which the council should reach. The account of his participation takes nine verses James, the half-brother of our Lord, was not one of the twelve apostles. James, the apostle, was put to death by Herod earlier as recorded by Luke in Acts And yet James is the one who seems to carry the greatest weight among the Jerusalem brethren.

How much weight did Paul carry among these Jerusalem Jewish saints? The participation of Paul and Barnabas is recorded in but one verse 12 in this chapter. And you will notice here the order of the two apostles to the Gentiles is listed in the reverse: This should come as no surprise. The apostles in Jerusalem were about as attracted to Paul as a cat to a dog. As an unbeliever, Paul was an extremist and hardly less as a Christian. The apostles were hesitant to accept him as a new believer Acts 9: They seem hesitant to accept him as a leader, let alone as a peer.

Could you compare and contrast Peter’s ministry and Paul’s ministry?

His input to the Jerusalem Council was not that of a spiritual heavyweight. There, it was James who carried the day. The Jerusalem Council did endorse Barnabas and Saul and disassociate themselves with those who had gone out to Antioch insisting that Gentile converts be circumcised. Nevertheless, the pressure applied by these lobbying legalizers never completely subsides. Their presence is somehow always lingering in Jerusalem in particular, but also even in the Gentile churches.

In Acts 21, Paul returns to Jerusalem bringing with him some representatives from the Gentile churches who carried contributions for the poor from grateful believers who had come to faith in Christ. The church leaders received Paul pleasantly; among them were James and all the elders Acts They rejoiced at the report Paul gave of his ministry among the Gentiles verse 19 , but they were very quick to turn the subject to the concerns of the more legalistic brethren, based upon false reports of his teaching and ministry verses They urged Paul to take their advice, and in so doing to put the minds of the more legalistic brethren at ease.

As you know from the Scriptures, it did not produce the desired result. Instead, it led to a riot and ultimately took Paul, in chains, to stand before Caesar in Rome. My concern here is James and the elders seem to have had too much interest in pacifying those who tended toward legalism. They are willing to take the initiative in dealing with Paul, but not so willing to take on the legalists, indeed, even the Jewish heretics such as we saw in Acts The best that can be said of the Jerusalem church is they were on the lagging edge of Gentile evangelism, and they seemed to drag their feet in dealing decisively with the error of the legalists with whom they seemed to be too closely associated.

How does Paul speak of them? An unbiased reading of Galatians 1 and 2 would lead us to say Paul did not speak of them with reverential awe.

Paul had little contact with the apostles or with the Jerusalem church leaders, especially in the early years after his conversion Galatians 1: His contacts with them were few and far between and of short duration. When he and Barnabas did go up to Jerusalem after 14 years, they took Titus with them. Paul refused, because it was clear they believed in a salvation by works and not by grace. Where were the apostles and church leaders while all this debate was taking place? They seem strangely silent. Paul seems to have to stand alone, along with Barnabas and Titus, in his confrontation with these legalistic Jewish heretics.

I am puzzled that the Jerusalem Jewish saints do not seem to take a prominent role in this conflict. Conversely, Peter does not just preach to Jews in Acts. His preaching in Acts is surely more directed toward the Jews, because he was living among Jews and speaking to them. But in his preaching to the household of Cornelius, his ministry is to Gentiles. And in his writing to the saints in his two epistles, Peter is ministering to many Gentiles.

The high court ruled that so long as the quality of education was the same, whites could be educated in all-white schools, while blacks could be taught in all-black schools. Separate, but equal, was simply not good enough. I believe this is precisely the policy the Jerusalem saints including their leaders wanted. They wanted Jewish churches and Gentile churches. They wanted apostles for the Jews and apostles for the Gentiles. In some ways the Jerusalem saints and their leaders seem to be more tolerant of the false brethren than they do of their Gentile brethren, or of men like Paul and Barnabas and others who preach to the Gentiles.

Peter came to Antioch, the Gentile church which had become the launching pad of Gentile evangelism. Paul was there as well, along with Barnabas and others. When Peter first arrived, he associated freely with the Gentile saints, eating his meals with them. These were of the circumcision party.

Can you imagine this? Peter was afraid of what these Jewish visitors thought! He was so intimidated by them that he acted hypocritically. He would rather offend his Gentile brethren than offend these legalists who might not even be saints. And by his actions, Peter influenced others to do likewise. Even a man like Barnabas was drawn into this disaster. Paul had just written that he was no man-pleaser 1: Publicly, Paul rebuked Peter face to face. He accused Peter of hypocrisy.

I doubt Peter was surprised by this charge. But Paul pressed this error to its ultimate and most despicable roots—it was a denial of the gospel.

The gospel declares all men to be sinners, under the wrath of God and doomed to eternal punishment. The Law saves no one by law-keeping but condemns Jew and Gentile alike.

When men are saved, they are saved by faith in Christ, apart from good works. The Jews can claim no merit, they can take no credit, with respect to their salvation, and thus they are no better than Gentile saints. The Jews thought that being Jews made them better than Gentiles. They looked upon Gentiles as sinners and upon themselves as saints 2: They therefore thought they had the right to establish standards for the Gentiles who would be saved. And the standard they set was to be circumcised as a symbol of their commitment to keep the Law.

When Peter withdrew his fellowship from the Gentile saints and associated himself only with the Jews, he identified himself with the error they embraced and the self-righteousness in which they gloried. And in so doing, Peter functionally denied the very gospel by which he and every other Jew was saved. To be saved, Gentiles do not have to embrace Judaism with its self-righteousness through law-keeping. To be saved, Jews cannot embrace self-righteousness through law-keeping, but must trust only in the Lord Jesus Christ.

And he is rebuked by Paul for doing so. Even though these two men travelled in different circles, Peter and Paul did encounter one another from time to time. But there were other links between these two men as well. Indeed, they have a very clear purpose. Paul is an apostle like he and the other disciples or apostles chosen by our Lord. His words are twisted by false teachers just as the rest of the Scriptures are verse Paul writes just as also Peter has written. These men are both in agreement in what they have written on many matters. While each author of a book in the Bible must be consistent with previous revelation, each one also makes a unique contribution to the Bible as a whole.

Because we believe in progressive revelation, we expect later inspired writings to go beyond that revealed by earlier writers.

There is a world of difference between going against previous Scripture and going beyond it. This principle is derived not only from the history of Peter and Paul outlined previously, but from these words of Peter in our text:. If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them 1 Corinthians I no longer believe this is what Peter actually meant. Peter also had obscure texts in his writings which cause students of Scripture to scratch their heads such as 1 Peter 3: It is true that cultists attempt to build doctrines on their interpretation of such texts.

But I am more inclined to think Peter means that false teachers distort the texts they do not like, ones they do not want to understand at face value so they can avoid changing their thinking and their lifestyle. We often find it impossible to understand those things we do not like or do not want to acknowledge as true. My wife is completely clear, and I am totally stubborn. Much of the communication gap between opposing viewpoints, between mates, between generations, is simply a refusal to hear the other side for fear we might have to admit it is true or we might have to change.

Its existence would take much of the pleasure out of my sin, because I would know that someday I will have to pay the price. Therefore I refuse to believe in hell, and any passage in Scripture which says there is a hell is too vague, too obscure, or inconsistent with too many other texts. The answer is simple: Here is the truth which God revealed through Paul to the church including the at least initially reluctant and later forgetful apostles:.

The apostles certainly including Peter were reluctant to believe that Paul was saved Acts 9. And certainly they were reluctant to believe that Gentiles should be evangelized Acts But in addition, Peter is admitting he was wrong, and Paul was right. Paul was right in his teaching in Ephesians 2 and 3. Paul was right in his definition of the gospel and of the relationship between Israel and the church see all of Romans, especially chapters Paul was right to rebuke Peter for his hypocrisy in Galatians 2. Peter learned much from Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, and so can his readers.

It is one thing to admit we are wrong and another person is right, which Peter does in effect by his words in our text. But Peter goes even further to say that he and Paul were not enemies. Indeed, Peter looks upon Paul as a brother—and ever further still—Paul is a beloved brother. Paul is regarded as such by Peter, and he should be so regarded by all the saints.

17 Comments

Paul is or should be our beloved brother. It was Paul who was ordained to write the clearest definition of the gospel in the Word of God, as found in the Book of Romans. Paul was raised up to offset the legalism not only of the heretics but also of the Jerusalem Jewish church leaders, including the apostles. Paul was the perfect counterpart to Peter and the other apostles. Peter and the other disciples were Galileans who naturally tended toward provincialism. Paul was a well-travelled man of the world, a man who knew more than one language or culture.

Peter and the other Galilean disciples were not a part of the Jewish religious hierarchy; Paul was one of the most devout, the most dedicated, the most prominent and the most promising leaders of the Pharisees. They were outside the religious system; Paul was from within.

WHAT DID APOSTLES DO IN THE EARLY CHURCH?

Can you explain Galatians 2: Was the Apostle Paul a false prophet? Who are the prophets of Romans Who are the people in 2 Corinthians Is the Ephesian church of the Revelation the same group as those in the Book of Ephesians? You are commenting using your WordPress.

You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Enjoy our Bible studies? You may donate securely here. All donation inquiries should be sent to me at arcministries gmail. Over studies, pages, and 20 themes! Peter was the leading apostle of the Messianic Church Matthew Paul was the leading apostle of the Church the Body of Christ Romans Gentiles would be saved through his ministry and the gospel message the Lord Jesus Christ committed to his trust verse See 19 and Repentance and water baptism were necessary for salvation Mark Peter and the 11 were commissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ to preach water baptism Matthew Paul claimed that Jesus Christ did not send him to water baptize 1 Corinthians 1: Paul preached that Jesus Christ was resurrected for our justification our right standing before God Romans 4: Peter and the 11 preached law as part of their salvation Matthew 5: Paul preached grace as part of our salvation Romans 3: They had to forgive others before God would forgive them Matthew 6: We forgive others because God has already forgiven us of all our sins Ephesians 4: Peter and the 11 preached that all material possessions were to be sold in order to receive salvation Acts 2: Paul preached that we are to work in order to eat and provide for our family 1 Timothy 5: Peter and the 11 preached about a kingdom on the earth Matthew 5: Paul preached about a kingdom in the heavens Ephesians 1: Peter and the 11 will one day sit on the 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel Matthew Paul made no reference to himself sitting on one of the thrones of Israel.

This was information that could be searched out and located in the Old Testament Scriptures John 5: They preached information that God had been dispensing since the world began, His plan to restore earth unto Himself. See 19, 34, and Paul never preached a works-religion message such as Acts God promised that He would bring a believing remnant through that wrath Jeremiah This is postponed while our program is operating.

Peter and the 11 were selected and commissioned by Jesus Christ while He was on the earth Matthew Paul was selected and commissioned by Jesus Christ from His resurrected, ascended, and glorified position in heaven Acts 9: Paul preached that physical circumcision was unnecessary for salvation Galatians 5: We are saved apart from any covenants such as the Abrahamic Covenant , and apart from any signs such as physical circumcision.

Peter and the 11 preached that confession of sins was necessary for salvation Matthew 6: Paul never preached confession of sins at all for salvation or for daily Christian living. Jesus Christ put away our sins; He fully dealt with them. If Jesus Christ did not fully deal with our sin problem at Calvary, what hope do we have that our weakly confession of sins to God or to a priest will accomplish anything?

See 3, 5, and 7. Peter and the 11 preached in order to convert all of Israel first Matthew The order of salvation in the prophetic program was Israel first, and then Israel would reach Gentiles in an earthly kingdom Isaiah 2: Paul preached to Jews and Gentiles—he had no divine commission to convert all of Israel before he ministered to Gentiles Acts 9: Paul never mentioned that the Temple was part of our Christian life. Paul never instructed us to give up all of our possessions lest God strike us dead. This message involved salvation going to Gentiles through redeemed Israel in an earthly kingdom.

In light of Colossians 1: See to the right. See 1, 9, and There is no Body of Christ mentioned. However, this supernatural apostolic ability to perform miracles progressively declined and eventually ceased at the end of his ministry 2 Corinthians Peter was opposed to preaching to Gentiles Acts

• Mammina vecchia fa buon brodo (Palpiti) (Italian Edition)
• The Thinkers Thesaurus: Sophisticated Alternatives to Common Words (Expanded Third Edition)
• The Red Pony (Penguin Modern Classics)
• Verona in 1 Day, 2012, Travel Smart and on Budget, visit the most important monuments in as little as 1 day (Goran Rodin Travel Guides - Travel Guidebook)
• Lauras Toes
• Le Fantôme Mène lEnquête (French Edition)