The Voice of the LORD God in the Garden

“They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.” (Gen 3:8, NASB)

 

We think we understand a verse in scripture until we start to examine the verse word by word. The word for “sound” is “qol,” which can mean sound, but is most often translated as “voice.” The KJV translates the verse as “They heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden…” Adam and Eve did not hear the sound of crunching leaves in the garden, but the voice of the LORD God in the garden.

 

The word “cool” originates from a Hebrew word familiar to many “ruach”. Ruach is primarily translated as spirit or wind. The JPS Tanakh renders the verse as “the breezy time of day.” The rendering makes it sound like there was a time of day to fly kites in the garden. Most often the word is translated into English as “spirit,” 127 times out of 375 times. The word is translated as “cool,” just this one time.

 

When the man and woman heard the voice, the Bible tells us they “hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God…” The word “presence” comes from the Hebrew word “panim”, which has a primary meaning of “face or faces.” This is the same word used in reference to Moses when scripture tells us, “The LORD used to speak to Moses face to face,” (Ex 33:11). Apparently Adam and Eve had a “face to face” relationship with the LORD God, but after they sinned, they “hid themselves from the face of the LORD God.” The implication for believers who find “the Way” (John 14:6), back into the garden through the blood of Jesus, we will know the LORD God “face to face,” (1 Cor 13:12).

 

Young’s literal is a little closer to the original Hebrew,

 

“And they hear the sound of Jehovah God walking up and down I the garden at the breeze of the day, and the man and his wife hide themselves from the face of Jehovah God in the midst of the trees of the garden,” (Gen 3:8, YLT)

 

Still the various translations seem to lose something from the original Hebrew. So here is my uninspired pass at capturing the passage.

 

“They heard the voice of the Spirit of the LORD God in the garden, but on that day Adam and Eve hid themselves from the face of the LORD God and became tree huggers.”

 

One last note, the word “heard” is “shema,” the same word used in the passage, “Hear (shema), O Israel!,” (Deut 6:4). The LORD God was calling Adam and Eve to obedience, just like Israel and believers today, but they were not obedient.  

 

So, how would you translate the passage?

Shabbot Shalom - Scott

Always A Benefit to Study

For those of us who get discouraged when we forget much of what we study, the following story is told by Rabbi Nathaniel Bushwick,

“It is related that a king once gave his servants buckets and instructed them to draw water from the well. When they began, they noticed that the buckets had many holes and that the water leaked out by the time the buckets were drawn to the top of the well. They stopped. When the king later asked them if they had done as he had told them, they replied that they had stopped because of the holes. ‘You should have continued,’ the king said. ‘I didn’t ask you to draw water because I wanted the water, but because I wanted the buckets cleaned.’ So it is with Torah. The substance of what one has studied may later be forgotten, but the process of studying is itself purifying."

Here is one more saying I recently read that comes from Rabbi Israel Salanter (1810-1883),

"Normally, we worry about our own material well-being and our neighbor's soul; let us rather worry about our neighbor's material well-being and our own souls."

(Scott)

Was Mom Right Afterall? - Part 2 of 2

JESUS AND THE APOSTLES

“Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works,” (John 14:10).

 

I am not aware of any place in the Greek text where Jesus is said to receive the word of the LORD through either a vision or a dream. I would not expect this to be the case because Jesus was a prophet after the pattern of Moses, (Deut 18:18). If Jesus was a prophet like Moses, then we would expect Him to have an intimate relationship with the Father, as the apostle John wrote, “I and the Father are one,” (John 10:30).

 

The Bible tells us that Moses beheld “the form of the LORD,” (Num 12:6-7). Like Moses, “The One who is from God; He (Jesus) has seen the Father,” (John 6:46)(John 1:18). Seeing the Father is indicative of a close relationship to the LORD. Just as the face of Moses shone because he had stood in the presence of God, so the face of Jesus shone as He stood in the presence of the Father on the Mount of Transfiguration, while the Father spoke, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!” (Matt 17:5).

 

Just as the words of Moses take precedence over the words of the prophets, we would expect the words of Jesus to have precedence over the words of the apostles based on the closer relationship of Jesus with the Father. On the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out, Peter quotes Joel as the proof text for what is happening.

 

“‘And it shall be in the last days,’ says God, ‘that I will pour forth My Spirit on all mankind; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; and your young men shall see visions; and your old men shall dream dreams,’” (Acts 2:17).

 

Visions and dreams elevate the Pentecost believers to the level of the prophets (Num 12:6-7), but NOT to the level of Jesus or Moses. The apostles are moved by the Holy Spirit, just as the prophets of old (2 Pet 1:21), and they are given the power to bind and loose in relationship to the traditions. However, their level of inspiration, and subsequently their written words, do not take precedence over a commandment or teaching given by Jesus.

 

Believers generally consider Paul to be the greatest apostle. Scripture indicates that Paul had visions (Acts 11:15), encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus, (Acts 9:3), and even was caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor 12:2). Paul’s experiences were similar to the great prophets who also had visions and encounters with the LORD. Visions show an elevated relationship with God, but visions do not raise the individual to the same plateau of closeness to the Father that Jesus or Moses had with the LORD.

 

This idea may sound strange, bordering on blasphemous, but even Paul acknowledged that his relationship with God was inferior to that of Jesus, “I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet… I press on toward the goal of the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus,” (Phil 3:13). Paul even placed himself beneath Moses when he wrote these words.

 

“Now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully,” (1 Cor 13:12).

 

As related earlier, the Sages viewed Moses as one looking through a clear windowpane, while the other prophets looked through a cloudy windowpane. Paul appears to be drawing on this understanding and applying it to himself (and us) when he said, “Now we see in a mirror dimly,” (1 Cor13:12). By his words, Paul positioned himself below Jesus and Moses, calling himself “the least of the apostles,” (1 Cor 15:9).

 

APPLICATION

 

Believers often fail to not see the distinctions that are made in the Bible. For example, believers classify all sin as the same in God’s eyes, not recognizing that the varying degrees of commanded punishments in the Torah indicate that all sin is not the same. Some believers talk about “one law” while other believers say that there is no difference between Jew and Greek because we are all “one”. Yet, these positions fail to recognize that scripture refers to “all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28), and there remains a different standard of behavior for the Jew and Greek. Therefore, it should not be surprising that believers traditionally view all scripture as equally inspired.

 

If believers have any slant in prioritizing the hierarchy of scripture, our tendency is to view the lessor inspired scripture (apostles' teachings and prophets) as greater, while we relegate the passages of higher inspiration (words of Jesus and Moses) to a lower status. Our actions are not without precedence, (1 Cor 12:23). In most churches, the prophets are elevated because of their prophecy related to Jesus, while the words of Moses are relegated to historical narrative done away by the New Covenant.

 

Even in the Greek Text, we elevate Paul’s words above the words and actions of Jesus. We believe that Jesus was the Son of Man, but see His actions as “fulfilling” and removing the obstructions of the Old Testament. The argument goes on to say that everything changed at the cross so we can discount the words and action of Jesus before the cross. However, if we look closely at the teachings of Jesus before the cross (Luke 4:43) and after the cross (Acts 1:3), we will see that the teachings of Jesus did not change, as it is written, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb 13:8), and “I, the LORD, do not change,” (Mal 3:6).

 

In the end I think mom was right. The words of Jesus do have a higher level of inspiration than the words of the apostles because Jesus had a closer relationship to the Father. Therefore, believers must, as the Father said, “listen to Him!” (Matt 17:5), even if that appears to come at the expense of the words of the apostles. There is a warning to the individual who does not hold the words of Jesus in the highest order of the inspired scripture hierarchy.

 

“Whoever will not listen to My words which he (the prophet like Moses) shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him,” (Deut 18:19).

 

Just as Moses spoke with the Father “face to face” so that his face shone full of the glory of the Father, so also the face of Jesus “shone like the sun, and His garments became as white as snow,” (Matt 17:2). Therefore, in regards to the words of Jesus,

 

“Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them, I will show you whom his is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on the rock; and when a flood occurred, the torrent burst against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built,” (Luke 6:47-48).

 

(just a thought - Scott)

Was Mom Right Afterall? - Part 1 of 2

 

“Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” (John 6:68-69)

 

Do the words of Jesus come with greater, equal, or less authority than the words of the apostles? Said another way, if a person would find a conflict between the words of Jesus and the words of Paul, which would have the controlling precedent?  

 

I seem to recall my mother telling me early in my life that she held the words of Jesus as greater authority in scripture because He was the Son of God. But was my mother right?  As I grew up, I learned that,

 

“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work,” (2 Tim 3:16-17)

 

For the majority of my life I understood the phrase “All Scripture is inspired” to mean that all scripture had the same level of authority. However, I have come to understand that two passages in scripture can be both inspired, while at the same time, one can have precedence over another. Take the commandments as an example. All the commandments given through Moses came under the same inspiration of God. Yet some commandments are considered greater, while other commandments are considered lessor, subordinate to the greater commandments. If the Bible establishes a priority among the commandments, does the Bible also recognize a priority among the biblical authors? Do some authors speak with greater authority? If so, why?

MOSES AND THE PROPHETS

"Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend." (Ex 33:11)

 

It is clear from scripture that Moses had a unique relationship with the LORD. Scripture tell us that Moses spoke “face to face” with the LORD “just as a man speaks to his friend.” Of the Hebrew prophets, Moses is seen as pre-eminent, standing in a class by himself. Leviticus Rabbah states it this way,

 

“What was the distinction between Moses and the other prophets? The latter looked through nine specularia (windowpanes), whereas Moses looked only through one. They looked through a cloudy sepcularia, but Moses through one that was clear.” (Lev.R. I.14)

 

The relationship Moses had with the LORD was more intimate than any other prophet.  Ther LORD said in relationship to Moses, 

 

“If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD,”

(Num 12:6-7)

The level of intimacy between the LORD and Moses elevates the writings of Moses to a position that is superior to the words of the prophets who followed because they only received the word of the LORD in visions and dreams. Even the great prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel received the word through visions, “I was looking in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. And four great beasts were coming up from the sea,” (Dan 7:2).

 

Since the prophets who followed Moses did not relate to the LORD in the same manner as Moses, “face to face” (Ex 33:11) and "mouth to mouth" (Num 12:7), the responsibility granted these prophets was to reiterate, magnify, and clarify the words given by Moses. The prophets were never given the authority to add or subtract from the original words. Moses cautioned those who followed by saying, “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you,” (Deut 4:2, 12:32).

 

The role of the prophets was reinforced by the beginning of the first book of prophecy where Joshua told the people, “ Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful where ever you go,” (Josh 1:7). The last book of prophecy concludes with a similar statement from Malichi, “Remember the law of my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel,” (Mal 4:4). The beginning and ending of the prophetic books are seen to frame the purpose of the prophets, to reinforce the teachings of Moses. The rabbis said it this way,

“You shall not say another Moses will arise and bring us another Torah from heaven, I have already made it know to you that “it is not in heaven” (Deut 30:12), i.e., there is nothing left of it in heaven.” (Deut R. 8:6)

 

Consequently, “What the prophets were destined to prophesy in subsequent generations they received from Mount Sinai (i.e. Moses), (Exod. R. XXVIII.6).”

(to be continued - Scott)

Sin, Suffering, and Righteousness - Part 2 of 9

SUFFERING: A CALL TO SELF EXAMINATION

“The presence of suffering in the world poses a problem for religion insofar as it seems to contradict the notion of an all powerful benevolent God. It would seem that if God were good, He would not want His creatures to suffer, and if, all powerful, He would be able to prevent their suffering.”  (Encyclopadia Judaica, Second Edition, Volume 19, "Suffering", page 291)

 

From the beginning, the Bible has recognized the existence of suffering cause by sin and the relationship of personal suffering to personal sin.  Since this relationship is strongly supported in scripture, the first person to examine in a time of tribulation is always our own self. God often uses suffering as the opportunity for self-examination to ensure that our walk is right before God, as it is written,

 

“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent,” (Rev 3:19).

 

The writer of Hebrews tells us that “Those whom the LORD loves He disciplines” and “It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline?” (Heb 12:6-7). The goal of suffering is “perfection” (Heb 5:9), “for our good, so that we may share His holiness,” (Heb 12:10).

 

Some have likened suffering from God to the work of a physician who sometimes is required to inflect pain to cause healing. Unfortunately, people most often see suffering as the convergence of random events that the individual has no control over. Consequently, individuals are rarely motivated to self-examination and the contemplation that could lead to significant change in our lives to the benefit of ourselves and those around us. Solomon, in his prayer during the dedication of the temple, spoke to the principle that God uses tribulation to bring about repentance,

 

“When the heavens are shut up and there is no rain, because they have sinned against You…If there is famine in the land, if there is pestilence, if there is blight or mildew, locust or grasshopper, if the enemy besieges them in the land of their cities, whatever plague, whatever sickness there is, whatever prayer or supplication is made by any man or by all Your people Israel…spreading his hands toward his house; then hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and forgive and act and render to each according to his ways,” (1 Kings 8:35-39).

 

Five hundred years earlier, Moses warned the nation of Israel, “If you are not careful to observe all the words of this law which are written in the book…then the LORD will bring extraordinary plagues on you and your descendants…He will bring back on you all the diseases of Egypt of which you were afraid, and they will cling to you,” (Deut 28:58-60). For Israel, sicknesses and suffering were both a sign of the nation’s sin and a call to repentance. Jesus confirmed this relationship saying, “Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” (Matt 4:17).

 

The principle of suffering as a call to self-examination carries into the Greek text. Luke records two examples that caused suffering and the interpretation of these events by Jesus.

 

“Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? 3 "I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. 4 "Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? 5 ‘I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.’ " (Luke 13:1-5)

 

Both the slaying of the individuals by Pilate and those who perished when the tower of Siloam fell can be viewed as chance events; these individuals just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Jesus adds support for this position by saying that the Galileans and the eighteen in Siloam who suffered death were not any greater sinners than the rest of the people. However, Jesus uses the events to call his disciples to self examination, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” In the view of Jesus, the death of these individuals occurred as a sign that foreshadowed the coming judgment that would occur on all of Israel if the nation did not repent.

 

Hurricanes in the Gulf hitting New Orleans, hurricanes hitting New Jersey, earthquakes in New Zealand and Japan, tornadoes moving through Alabama, flooding along the Mississippi, and drought in West Texas and across much of the United States, should not be seen as random events. As in the Bible, these events are the call of God for all individuals to examine our personal walk and the walk of the greater community and nation. Do you suppose those 3000 people who died in the twin towers and onboard airplanes on 9/11 were greater sinners than other Americans? Or do you suppose the 300 people who died in the tornadoes in Alabama in April 2011 were worst sinners than the rest of the nation? Were the 25,000 people who died in the earthquake and tsunami in Japan greater sinners than the rest of us? “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

 

When a famine occurred for three years, David sought the LORD to determine the cause.  The LORD told David, “It is for Saul and his bloody house, because he put the Gibeonites to death,” (2 Sam 21:1).   The problem is that the average person and nation does not know the origin of their suffering and lack a prophet capable of revealing the origin.  The mistake of some evangelists in the United States is not that they associate national judgment with the sin, but that they attempt to connect a specific judgment with a specific sin. For example, the toleration of homosexuality does impact the nation, but it is far from the single cause of the nation’s suffering.  In the story recorded by Luke, the words of Jesus do not indicate that the death of the Galileans and the eighteen in Siloam occurred for any particular sin, but for the unrepentant hearts of the people in general. The future plagues contained in the Book of Revelations are given as a call to repentance,

 

“The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands…and did not repent of their murders nor of their sorceries nor of their immorality nor of their thefts,” (Rev 9:20-21).

 

The recent national and world events may portend the initial stages of a greater coming judgment from God on the United States and the world if people do not repent. To the individuals who say that God does not operate in the is manner consider the fate of the United States in light of the path we have chosen and the words of the LORD who said, “In every place where I cause My name to be remembered, I will come to you and bless you,” (Ex 20:24). We may constantly ask God to “bless the United States,” but our lives are often not worthy of blessing. The consequences are inevitable without a course change.  As it was said over two thousand years ago, so it remains true today, “Unless you repent, you will likewise perish.”

 

(to be continued - Scott)

Paul Opposed Peter For the Sake of Heaven - Part 4 of 4

Everything probably went well during Peter’s time in Antioch until, “Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved,’” (Acts 15:1). These “certain men from James” (Gal 2:12), may have been those who disagreed with Saul and Barnabas, when they had been in Jerusalem two years earlier. Although they came to discuss the issue of circumcision, these men may have also come to inform Peter that Herod Agrippa was dead and that it was safe to return to Jerusalem. When they arrived, Peter apparently reverted to the more orthodox positions of his faith that focused on the washing of hands and the potential exposure to meats sacrificed to idols. In Peter’s defense, the Second Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was still in the future, leaving the Gentile question unresolved and Peter’s actions understandable. Separation of Jews from Gentiles had been the norm for 1500 years and nothing had been “loosed” for Peter to think differently and so other Jews followed.

 

When Saul returned to Antioch, he was probably already on edge because John Mark had left them in Pamphylia on the journey, (Acts 15:38). This separation ultimately led to the parting of Saul and Barnabas, and the latter probably heard an earful from the former on the return trip. When Barnabas and Saul arrived back in Antioch, they found a body of believers split by the circumcision question. Turmoil on the trip and in Antioch “great dissension and debate” on the circumcision question until “the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas…should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue,” (Acts 15:2). During the debate, Paul blasted Peter for letting the situation get out of hand to the point that “even Barnabas was carried away by the hypocrisy,” (Gal 2:13).  (It is probably not surprising that Barnabas was ready for a break from Paul after the John Mark episode, but its always easier to focus on a different cause than blame ourselves for a problem.)

 

Paul was extremely hard on Peter, saying Peter “stood condemned” (Gal 2:11) held “himself aloof” and was a “hypocrite,” (Gal 2:13). These are strong accusations that run contrary to Paul’s own teaching, “There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,” (Rom 8:1). Further, Paul expressed his disagreement in public and not one-on-one following the pattern Jesus outlined in Matthew, (Matt 18:15-17). Was Peter right? Not necessarily. Was he wrong? Not completely. We need to appreciate that Peter’s actions preceded the decision of the Second Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 and were understandable for a Jew trying to maintain the dietary laws and the laws of cleanliness.

 

As with all disputes for the sake of heaven, much understanding and good resulted from the episode between Paul and Peter.  That most people think the dispute reflects “poorly” on Peter is understandable.  However, I think if framed in the proper perspective, it is Peter who comes out reflecting the best response to a difficult situation.

 

If Peter argued back against Paul, his argument is not recorded in scripture. In fact, Peter was apparently able to hear Paul’s message behind the harsh rhetoric, “If you (Peter), being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” (Gal 2:14). Peter listened to Paul on that day and later repackaged the concept to use in his closing argument at the second Jerusalem Council, “Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?,” (Acts 15:7-10).

 

Although Paul and Barnabas related the signs and wonders God had done through them, it was ultimately the words of Peter, not Paul, that formed the basis for James’ decision.

 

“Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. With this the words of the Prophets agree…Therefore it is my judgement that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,” (Acts 15:13-19).

 

Peter does not get the credit he desires for listening to Paul. We can only surmise what would have happened if Peter’s anger had kept him from hearing out the words of Paul. This is a lesson for us when a brother uses harsh words, yet, there may be truth we need to hear.

 

 Did Peter forgive Paul? There is no need to ask. It was Peter who referred to Paul 15 years later as, “our beloved brother Paul” (2 Pet 3:15). Still even then Peter would say that Paul’s words are sometimes “hard to understand.”

 

However bad the situation, we must always remember that good resulted out of one of the most contentious confrontations between believers in the Greek text; not just good for Gentiles living in the first century, but for Gentiles living in the twenty-first century. The turmoil in Antioch forced the elders in Jerusalem to decide once and for all on the status of the Gentiles in the growing body of believers. The Second Council at Jerusalem (A.D. 48-50?) forever determined, in the words of Paul, that, “Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called,” (1 Cor 7:20). Saul and Barnabas, took the letter written by James and the elders back down to Antioch.

 

“When they had read it, they (the congregation) rejoiced because of its encouragement,” (Acts 15:31).

(the end - Scott)

Paul Opposed Peter For the Sake of Heaven - Part 3 of 4

The first encounter between Saul and the elders (Acts 11:28)(Gal 2:6-9) still left open the question of circumcision and Torah observance on the Gentiles in the growing body of believers. Although Saul indicated some pressure by the brethren who “spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage…,” Saul insisted, “we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour,” (Gal 2:4-5). In Jerusalem, the believers apparently agreed to disagree, at least for the moment. After the meeting, “Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem when they had fulfilled their mission,” (Acts 12:25).

 

Probably during or shortly after Saul’s visit, James the brother of John was killed. Peter, who had been present during the meeting between Saul and elders at Jerusalem, was subsequently imprisoned by Herod Agrippa (A.D. 44). An angel of the LORD miraculously delivered Peter from prison and he immediately went to the house of Mary where many were gathered praying for him. The Mary in question is the mother of John Mark, the cousin of Barnabas (Col 4:10), the associate of Paul. This gathering occured prior to Saul’s first missionary journey (A.D. 45-47) and the unnamed group of believers could have easily included Barnabas and Saul.

 

After describing how the Lord led him out of the prison, Peter said, “‘Report these things to James and the brethren,’ then he left and went to another place,” (Acts 12:17). The implication is that Peter went to an “undisclosed location,” a place out of the sight and out of the reach of Herod Agrippa. Peter needed to leave Jerusalem because Herod Agrippa would certainly search for Peter. The next day Agrippa did search for Peter and when he failed to find him, he ordered the guards to be executed.

 

Although Peter had been miraculously saved by an angel of the LORD, he remained in danger as long as he stayed in Jerusalem and Judea. Just like the parents of Jesus who fled from the presence of Herod the Great, Peter had to flee from Herod Agrippa. The logical place for Peter to travel was north through the believers who he had earlier discipled in Samaria and Galilee. In northern Galilee, Peter was just a short distance to Antioch in Syria beyond the jurisdiction of Herod Agrippa. In Antioch, Peter would find support among believers including Barnabas and Saul, who he had just seen in Jerusalem and may have even recommended this strategy to Peter.

 

Peter may have arrived in Antioch before or concurrent with the return of Barnabas and Saul. It was shortly after their return to Antioch from Jerusalem that the Holy Spirit set Barnabas and Saul apart for taking the gospel to the Gentiles. From Antioch, Barnabas and Saul, along with John Mark, begin the first of Paul’s three missionary journeys in scripture (A.D. 45-47). If Peter was in Antioch at the time of Saul’s departure, Saul probably felt good leaving the church in the hands of such a capable apostle as Peter. (I have to place Saul away from Antioch at some point during Peter’s visit because it is difficult for me to understand how the problem among believers at Antioch would have begun in Saul’s presence.)

 

I suspect Peter found Antioch to be an inviting place to live. Although he was away from the brethren in Judea, Peter found Jewish believers in Antioch who felt blessed to have the fellowship of one who walked with the Master. In this way, Peter was still fulfilling his ministry to the circumcised. Peter may have even found the time and opportunity to visit other believers in Galatia. Over time, Peter assimilated into the Hellenistic culture of Antioch. Did Peter abandon the kosher commandments or the laws of cleanliness, unlikely, but eating with Gentile believers was not a common practice among Jews with a Pharisaic background. 

(to be continued - Scott)