Why did Paul not challenge Peter? by Pastor Melissa Scott

November 18, 2010 · Posted in Pastor Melissa Scott · Comments Off 

I’m so tired of seeing brothers who profess to be brothers or sisters who profess to be sisters and they don’t understand the matter that’s being addressed. We’re not talking about, you know, something so radically complicated. Why did Paul not challenge Peter? When it says he confronted him and he withstood him to the face, he wasn’t challenging his apostleship. He was challenging Peter’s hypocrisy, because he’d eat here with these people, but if those folks came then he’d go, “Oh, I don’t go eat with those people. No, not me.”

Pastor Melissa Scott tells us that it’s time that the message be brought just right in the middle. A great balance that says this is what grace does. You know if you want to go back to the law and you want a church that preaches the law, that’s your problem. The law to me is equal with; it’s equal with, and on the same plane as if you look to the law again, you crucify Christ afresh. And if you wish to live in the law it makes Christ death nothing, of no avail. That’s why we don’t look to it anymore. We look to what Jesus says.

Now Paul is saying, he’s going to remind them. I’ve got a verb sheet (handout), and I’m going to bore some of you just because I can! So Paul is saying here, it says, “I certify” – hm, I don’t know, it’s King James, “I certify”. This word is norizo, it’s from the word gnosis, “I make known to you.” But what’s interesting about this, “So I make known to you,” this verb is put in the present, present and active tenses. And I thought that was interesting because the present means the action is continuous and active means the actor is doing it. So you have this concept that I think he had to maybe remind them more than once of. This is what the verb tells me. This is why we do grammar because it’s just a little bit more than “I certify, I certify to you brethren,” in stained-glass tones. No.