2022-05-29 Debunking Discrimination Acts 11:1-18

DEBUNKING DISCRIMINATION (Acts 11:1-18) May 31, 2022 Read Acts 11:1-18 - Imagine you die and Peter greets you at the Pearly Gates with simple entry exam: "Spell God." You say, "G-O-D." "Come right on in." Billy Graham arrives, gets the same test and is allowed in. Then Peter calls you over; asks you to take over so he can have a break! So, the 1st person to show up is the nasty guy down the street whose yard is a mess, whose dog runs loose and who violates every HOA restriction. You hate him. And you're in charge! You tell him about the test. He blows, but calms down when he realizes there's "Okay. What's the test?" You say, "Spell Czechoslovakia." Why's that funny? Bc we have hearts that discriminate! It's a story, of course. You don't get a say about who gets in heaven and neither does Peter. But the question is - what if you did? Who is it that you think is beyond the saving power of Jesus Christ? Or better stated, "Who is it that you would like to be beyond the saving power of JC?" That's what this text is all about. Amazingly, almost 10 years after the church began it is still almost entirely Jewish. Jesus' instructions to take the gospel to the far corners of the earth have not happened. Expansion driven by persecution is almost entirely among Jewish people. Why? Centuries old prejudice. Discriminating hearts. The Jews hate the Gentiles; the Gentiles hate the Jew and never the twain shall meet. So when God forces the issue by sending a reluctant Peter to Cornelius' house, Luke tells the story twice, despite being limited to 35 feet of papyrus scroll. That's how critical it is. God's heart is not discriminatory like ours. So, Peter has gotten the message, has gone to Cornelius' home and seen them saved. But the fight is far from over. Now we get the rest of the story. I. The Rebuke By the time Peter got back to Jerusalem from Cornelius' home - trouble was brewing. The news that Peter had gone to Gentiles sent shock waves among the Jewish believers - especially a group called the "circumcision party." So, when Peter arrived back in town, he was called to account and rebuked for his actions. Please note; Peter had nothing like papal authority claimed by some. He was certainly recognized as a leader of the apostles, but he was not above criticism. This group wanted answers and they wanted them now. So who is this circumcision party? A little background. Prior to Jesus how did people come to God? Convoluted answers abound, but the real answer is, the same as we are saved today - by believing God. Take Abe: Gen 15:6: "And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness." It wasn't circumcision which didn't even come until 2 chapters later. It wasn't sacrifices; it wasn't keeping the Law which didn't exist yet. It was by grace thru faith just as it's always been. Prior to Jesus, faith was demonstrated by obedience to God's commands as they became known - like circumcision; sacrifices; keeping the law. Just like saving faith now is expressed in obedience to God's commands - starting with baptism and all the other imperatives of the NT. Genuine faith isn't perfect, but it eagerly pursues God. For a Gentile in OT times, obeying God as an expression of faith presented a particular challenge. Since the law was given to Jews and involved all manner of Jewish customs, a Gentile convert had to basically become a Jew - a proselyte - to express the reality of faith. That meant circumcision, dietary laws, committing to the moral law, and following the sacrificial system. Now, after Christ, we have an almost exclusively Jewish church. They've grown up in the Judaism, they were already circumcised, and while they now accepted Jesus as the one legitimate sacrifice for sin, they continued many of the Jewish practices - the dietary laws, the feast days and perhaps even the sacrifices until it became clear those were fulfilled in Christ. They were genuine Xn believers, yes, but they retained much of their Jewish heritage. So, as Samaritan half-breeds and full-blooded Gentiles came to faith in Christ, they assumed they would have to become Jewish proselytes - meaning circumcision and adherence Jewish regulations. They didn't have Galatians, Romans, Hebrews and Ephesians to instruct them in detail on the implications of their new faith. In their view at the time to be Xn was to be Jewish. This was how the "circumcision party" thought. They were converted Pharisees or some of the "great many of the priests" (Acts 6:7) who became believers. There is no hint that they were not true believers, but they were not ready to accept Gentiles without them coming thru the door of Judaism. They didn't exclude Gentlies. They didn't tell Peter, "It is not right to allow Gentiles to follow Christ." They accused, 3 "You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them." "How could you, Peter? You ate with them implying acceptance of them as Xns and they're not even circumcised yet." Old prejudices were dying a hard death. They were appalled at Peter's implied acceptance of Gentles prior to them accepting Jewish regulations. II. The Response So, Peter must respond. And I love how he did it. He didn't pull rank, showed no anger that they would question him, but instead he gave them an orderly, and in the end, unanswerable explanation. It's a beautiful example of what it means to hear and follow the Lord's guidance. He explains in three parts. A. Peter Would Not Violate God's Pronouncement - Peter repeats the vision where he was told to "Rise, Peter; kill and eat" a feast that includes previously unclean animals. Three times he objects only to be told, "What God has made clean, do not call common." In other words, "Drop your prejudice, Peter. God defined unclean animals, He has the right to remove the stigma. He has the equal right to declare Jew and Gentile equal partners in the issue of salvation." Peter says, "This vision confused me. It took me three times to get it. But when I did, what else could I do. I could not violate God's pronouncement." Hard to argue that, isn't it? Now, God seldom uses visions today. The reason is simple. We do have Gal, Rom, Eph, Hebrews and the rest of the NT to flesh out the meaning of the gospel. And God is very clear; what we have is adequate for what we need. II Tim 3:16 "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." What we have by God's own testimony is sufficient to complete and equip us - for every good work. That's why I get so concerned when I hear people like Sarah Young declare: "I knew that God communicated with me through the Bible, but I yearned for more. Increasingly I wanted to hear what God had to say to me personally on a given day." I would hate to find myself explaining to God one day why I thought His Word was not sufficient when He clearly says it is! Peter knew the folly of such thinking. He says in II Pet 1:17 "For when he [Jesus] received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven [John, James and himself], for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts." Peter is saying, "I had a very privileged communication from God. I was on the Mt of Transfiguration. But that was mine; and you won't have that because you weren't there. But there's something greater we share in common - the prophetic word - the Bible." God's not going to violate His own Word, right? So many people claim they got some feeling, some dream, some prompting contrary to the Word. I fear for them. And this is true when it comes to how we treat others. Jas 2:1: "My brothers, show no partiality." True for Peter; true for us. It you truly want God's will, your first step is to say, "I cannot violate God's Word." So we must read, study, learn until it becomes like the air we breathe. Then, obey! B. Peter Would Not Violate God's Providence Providence is God working out His plan thru everyday events, as He did here. 11 And behold, at that very moment three men arrived at the house in which we were, sent to me from Caesarea." It would be hard to miss this trail! First, Peter prayed. Then he got a Word from God -- 3 times Then 3 men arrive who know Peter's name, know where he's staying, and have their own incredible story. Circumstances began to confirm what Peter was already hearing from the Lord. For the believer, circumstances are never just circumstances! Problem is, people often misread circumstances. They must be confirmed thru the Word and prayer. How many people have presumptuously read events as supporting the way they want to go rather than discerning what God is really saying? Signs are dangerous. Imagine a man in deep financial trouble. One day he finds the company safe unlocked, decides that's God's floating him a temporary loan he'll soon pay back. More likely, he'll end up in jail. God doesn't give signs against His character and His Word - but the devil might! So discernment is imperative. Make sure you are not telling yourself a lie. How? First, check if it violates Scripture. Don't act hastily. Give it some time. Third, do what Peter did. With evidence seeming to point one way, he checked it out one more time. The result is 12 And the Spirit told me to go with them, making no distinction." How? The same way He speaks to us as we honestly seek His will and open ourselves to His inner promptings As Peter did that, he got confirmation. Yes - you are reading things correctly. Even tho these men are Gentiles and taking you to a Gentile home, you need to go with them. Against his every inclination, he obeyed, not violating God's providence C. Peter Would Not Violate God's Proof Finally, having followed God's leading to Cornelius' home, Peter's sermon was interrupted: 15 "As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. [tongue-speaking as evidence of HS coming was not an everyday event. Peter recognized this as a repetition of Pentecost, not an ongoing event] 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" Peter needed no more proof. He got the message. Despite his reservation, God was clearly just as available to Gentiles as He was to Jews. Any thoughts of further discrimination based on race were erased from his mind and behavior. This was a powerful message to the circumcision party. They knew Peter had opposed Gentiles as much as they. But clearly Peter had acted appropriately given his description of events? And God had supplied the final proof by gifting these believers in the same way He had the apostles at Pentecost. The manmade barrier had been torn down by God Himself in the person of the HS. III. The Result What happened next shows the sincere faith of Peter's accusers. 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life." Clearly God was serious about building His church among all people, to the end of the earth. Now, we'll see the issue crop up again in Acts 15, but this group recognized God was granting repentance to Gentile as well as Jew. Conc -- Now, we don't really have discussions today about God loving both Jew and Gentile. We get that. But let me repeat our original question. Who is it that you think is beyond the saving power of Jesus Christ? Or better, "Who is it that you would like to be beyond the saving power of JC?" Let me make a very practical illustration which represents a challenge to most of us. Twenty-two years ago, Rosaria Butterfield was a tenured professor at Syracuse, head of the Women's Studies Department, radical feminist and lesbian. In response to an article she'd written defending her positions, a pastor responded in a respectful manner with a series of questions. Incensed, she threw the response away, but later began a two-year correspondence and eventually face-to-face relationship that ended up in her conversion to Christ. She gave up her relationship, her dedication to radical feminism and eventually her position, married a pastor, and became a homeschooling mother. Had that pastor been practicing the normal discrimination most of us feel, none of that would have happened. She says today, "Even tho I am no longer a lesbian, I'm still a sinner. I'm redeemed, but still fallen. I believe God is more grieved by the sins of my current life than by my past life. How did God heal me? The way that he always heals: the word of God got to be bigger inside me than I. My natural inclination was to resist, so I did. God's people surrounded me. Not to badger. But to love and to listen and to watch and to pray. And eventually instead of resisting, I surrendered." Would we surround such a seeking person? I don't mean accept the sin. But I mean love the sinner. Would we open arms to them, or would we dismiss them immediately as unclean? Can we stand against lifestyles that violate God's character and commands and still reach out in love to urge repentance and renewal and healing? Or do our actions and prayers rise no higher than our prejudices. "Who is it we would like to think beyond the saving power of JC?" I trust the answer is, "No one!" Let's pray. DONE 7