Now the apostles and the brethren who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those who were circumcised took issue with him, saying, "You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them." (Acts 11:1-3 NASB)When Jesus ministers on earth, several of his most poignant services are to Gentiles. For instance, Matthew records the centurion who came to Jesus asking that his servant be healed, but only that Jesus say so, not that he come to the centurion's house. Jesus makes an interesting comment in this account (Mat. 8:11-12) where He says that "many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness"
You might be led to believe that Jesus was referring to Gentiles. After all, the context was His comment on the faith of a Gentile. Yet, we find that Jesus' disciples seem to miss this reference, even after His resurrection, after the filling by the Spirit on Pentecost, and after Jesus tells them to spread His good news to the ends of the earth. So, why the confusion? Perhaps it lies in that there was an assumption that the disciples carried with them as they heard these words, saw these things, and looked around them to follow suit.
Those in Jerusalem in this passage are referred to as "the circumcision" (literally, "the ones from out of circumcision"). It is an odd designation to give to disciples in Jerusalem. It gives the impression that it doesn't refer to all of the disciples, but to some. Yet weren't they all Jews? Why refer to some of them as "from out of circumcision"? I suspect that this group was marked by views that were specifically tied to this distinguishing feature of Judaism. It was one of two that marked Jews distinctly from the people around whom they lived.
When they hear of Gentiles receiving the word of God, they go to Peter, but ask a different question. It's not that Gentiles heard the word of God. It's not that Gentiles had faith in Jesus. Their issue is that Peter ate with the Gentiles. He had crossed a line of demarcation between the Jews and Gentiles. He had ignored a separation that this group held sacred. An assumption is revealed: To come to God through Jesus, one must first be a Jew. Peter's testimony reveals that God has accepted these Gentiles as they are without requiring them to separate from the rest of the Gentile world into Judaism. Suddenly the comment made by Jesus that many would come from the east and west and that the children of the Kingdom would not takes on a more dire meaning.
Two thousand years later, it's easy to look back at these people and scoff. But don't I do that? Don't I assume that my Master only accepts people like me? Seriously, if I don't go to all sorts of people, (and I live around all sorts of people) then am I really declaring that my Master calls and draws people of all sorts? Or is it that I really want to reach people like me, people in my comfort zone who are easy for me to talk with? It is difficult for me to say that I believe as Jesus said, that many will come from all over (east and west, not just west) and dine in the Kingdom of my Master, yet withhold myself from those from all over.
I admit that I hear of the work of my Master and rejoice. That's good. These of the circumcision didn't, so I'm better off right? And this issue isn't over for them, they cause trouble over and over throughout Acts. So, I'm totally better off, am I not? I'm not. I'm can't speak for you, but I can tell you that I haven't gone to the weird people around me. I can tell you that those around whom I'm not comfortable, I keep quiet about the amazing truth in which I live. Jesus, the Maker and Sustainer of this universe, loves me. But He loves them too. They need to know that. They may reject the knowledge, but they need to at least hear it to reject it. I've kept quiet. Shame on me.
No comments:
Post a Comment