Preaching Peace By Jesus Christ  (Part 1 of 1)

Paul preaches the Peace of Christ – Acts 10:36

Part 1

This article is intended to explore one of the issues raised by the letter on the formation of new ecclesias which was printed in the last issue.1 The writer of that letter cited certain brethren as holding the opinion that to circulate the Statement of Faith to the members of the ecclesia would be divisive. This article is written out of a concern that some in the Brotherhood today view division as an evil to be avoided at all costs – even if truth has to be compromised in the process. Maintaining a state of peace and harmony in the ecclesia is seen as a prime duty by some ecclesial elders. However, James wrote: “The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable” (3:17). To Joram’s question, “Is it peace, Jehu?” the latter replied, “What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?” (2 Kings 9:22). The quotation from Kings might seem inappropriate in an ecclesial context; but Jesus’ application of the term “Jezebel” to some in the ecclesia at Thyatira (Rev.2:20) rules out any possible objection. 

An Enigma 

In Acts 10:36,37 it is recorded that Peter, addressing the household of Cornelius, spoke of “the word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ..;”. This “word” which Jesus had preached was subsequently proclaimed to both Jew and Gentile by the apostles. These chosen men, equipped with the gifts of the Spirit, discharged their task so faithfully that Paul could write to the Ephesians that “(Jesus) came and preached peace to you;..” when, in fact, he and his fellow-apostles had actually visited them and spoken to them; Most of the record of their preaching is to be found in the book of Acts, but it does not take much investigation of that book to discover that Peter’s statement in chapter 10:36 presents us with a problem. A straightforward analysis of the apostolic preaching recorded in the book reveals that the apostles in fact did not “preach peace”, and peace did not come about as a result of their preaching, either in the Roman Empire or in the first century ecclesia. 

The Greek word translated “peace” in Acts 10:36 only occurs seven times in the whole of the book of Acts – and never in the records of the direct preaching of the apostles. In fact, it only occurs three times in the context of the work of Truth! One of these is obviously in chapter 10:36; the other two are in chapter 9:31, where the context is of the ecclesias enjoying a time of peace after the departure of Paul, who had been “disputing against the Grecians”(hence the absence of peace in the ecclesias), and in chapter 15:33, where it is said that two of the letter-bearers were let go back from Antioch to Jerusalem “in peace” after a period of time in which there had been “no small dissension and disputation” (v.2) in the Antiochan ecclesia. 

The New Testament records of the first century ecclesia reveal a marked absence of “peace” and indicate that there were many areas of conflict, strife and division over both doctrinal and moral issues; The history of the Christadelphian community over the last 130 years has been little different; In the 19th century there were divisions over fellowship, what constituted essential doctrine, the nature of Jesus, the inspiration of Scripture and resurrectional responsibility; in the 20th, over police service, the nature of Jesus, divorce and remarriage, fellowship, the work of the Holy Spirit, relationships with the sects of Christendom and many other issues which have troubled the ecclesia. 

Some brethren take the view that all such strife and conflict is wrong and unChristlike, and that “there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another” (1 Cor. 12:25). “If we are to progress in the right spiritual direction”, wrote one brother, “we must avoid every cause and occasion of division; unity must be our predominant aim…schism tends to weaken..;the stability of our organisation…If the body is to increase in strength it must avoid the errors of the past..;” 2 This article will seek to demonstrate that the view just quoted is not in fact a reflection of all that the Scriptures teach on this subject and will also show that there is only one way to achieve the unity which all would agree is desirable. In the world it is possible to see a number of methods used to deal with strife and division in society; None of these methods has any place in ecclesial life, although they have been, and are still being used by some brethren and ecclesias in attempts to deal with the various problems which arise and threaten to become divisive. Before we go on to look at this, however, it is necessary to-go back to Acts 10:36 and find out what is the Scriptural meaning of the phrase “preaching peace by Jesus Christ”, since it is obvious that peace, harmony and unity within the ecclesia did not and has not resulted from their preaching. 

What did the Apostles preach? 

We have already seen that the term “peace” does not feature in the apostolic preaching recorded in Acts; What then did they preach? Long-term readers of “The Bible Student” may recall that this subject was examined in Vol-12 Nos 5 & 6 and Vol-13 Nos 4 & 5; A brief summary of one of these studies (an examination of the contexts of the six Greek words translated “preach” etc. in Acts) indicates that the apostles preached: 

  1. A living God who created all things and who made promises to the fathers.
  2. These promises spoke of Messiah who would die and rise again – Jesus, Son of God.
  3.  That a way of salvation is now open as a result of Jesus’ sacrifice.
  4.  Men obtain salvation by turning to God and receiving forgiveness through Jesus’ work.
  5.  Personal holiness of living is required, for a time of judgment is coming.
  6.  Jesus (who now has all power) is the appointed judge of living and dead.
  7.  The hope for believers s of resurrection to endless life in the Kingdom on earth.
  8. That this good news is for both Jews and Gentiles. 

Thus it can be seen that the apostles preached very little about peace in a detailed message which they expected their hearers to understand, accept and believe (see Acts 2:42, 8:12 etc.) As a result of a study which has not published, I have come to the conclusion that this Apostlic preaching and the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith correspond very closely, i.e; the BASF is a very good and accurate statement of the doctrines which the Scriptures themselves teach are to be believed by those who seek to respond to God’s offer of salvation; If the circulation of the Statement of Faith in an ecclesia is divisive, that division is caused by the presence in the ecclesia of some who do not believe its teaching and are therefore not in “the apostles’ fellowship” (Acts 2:42); One might ask the question, ‘Why are such individuals in the ecclesia anyway?” 

Division, Strife and Contention 

It is a fact that the more we look at New Testament preaching and ecclesial activity, the less “peace” we find. Perhaps we are looking in the wrong direction. Consider these words of Jesus: “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set  man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household” (Matt. 10:34-36). Thus Jesus prophesied that there would be division rather than peace as a result of his work among men. What actually happened? 

After the initial preaching of the apostles in Jerusalem, the gospel was spread abroad and soon reached Antioch in Syria; A thriving ecclesia was established with Paul, Barnabas and several other prophets active in the work; Then, Acts 15 records: “certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (v.1). It is important to notice that those “certain men” were brethren, for verse 5 describes them as “certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed”; They were not Jews seeking to convert the members of the ecclesia to Judaism; they were members of the Jerusalem ecclesia who were saying, “Yes, you must believe on Jesus, but you must also keep the law!” It was “another gospel” 

(Gal.1:6) and therefore those who preached it were not accorded the title “brethren” in the record, and “Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and  disputation with them” (v.2); When the issue was raised in the Jerusalem ecclesia there was “much disputing” (v.7). This is the inevitable result of the introduction of false teaching into any ecclesia which contains brethren who have the same mind and attitude as the apostles. 

In his first letter to Corinth Paul wrote, “Now I beseech you, brethren that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1:10). Oneness of mind is the only Scriptural way in which divisions can be avoided; but as soon as one began to say, “I am of Paul” and another, “I of Apollos” (v;12), the result was an ecclesia rent with schism. 

Far from “preaching peace” at any price, the apostolic reaction to these sort of situations was, “Ye should earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints” (Jude v.3); “If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house” (2 John v.10); “If any man preach any other gospel…Let him be accursed” (Gal.1:9). This was their way (indeed, it is God’s way) of dealing with error; All strife in the first century ecclesia can be related to these principles – the passages referred to above form but a fraction of those which could be cited. 

Paul was “set for the defence of the gospel” (Phil.1:17), and in the course of the defence which he and his fellow apostles undertook, there came about the divisions of which Jesus had prophesied. The divisions arose simply because some could not accept his teaching; some said Jesus had come in the flesh, others said he had not, and the result was schism; 

The situation is no different today; If some brethren in an ecclesia take the view that “the Comforter…is.;.one through whose help and encouragement, through whose power and influence upon ourselves, we are brought before God in a right relation with Him”,3 while others hold that “the promise of Jesus to send the Comforter can have no application of a personal nature in these days. We have seen the promise fulfilled and its work accomplished in the Apostles, not as a sentiment or feeling, but as a worker of miracles and as a lightgiver in their minds”,4 there will be (or there ought to be) a conflict situation between them; If some in the ecclesia say, “Yes, there is an exceptive clause and it applies to the saints” and others take the view that in Matthew 5 and 19 Jesus was teaching those who were under the law what the law truly meant, at a time when some had broadened it far beyond what God had allowed – even for hard-hearted Israel, then again there will be contention. 

In these days there is no Jerusalem council to appeal to when contentious and potentially divisive issues arise in the ecclesia; There is now only one source of authoritative teaching – “To the law and to the testimony; If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Is. 8:20 RV). We must therefore “study to show (ourselves) approved unto God, (workmen who need) not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim.2:15). 

If in our times “certain men” will not heed the Word, but persist in teaching “profane and vain babblings” which “eat as doth a canker” (2 Tim.2:16) into the fabric of the ecclesia, the apostolic way to deal with the situation is for those sound in the faith to contend earnestly with them and (if they will not heed the Word) eventually separate from them. 

Peace with God 

If, as has been seen, the apostles’ did not “preach peace” in the sense of urging men to bury their differences and co-exist together, what is the “peace” which is referred to in Acts 10:36? 

In Ephesians 2 Paul reminded the Gentile believers of their state before God had called them. They had been “without Christ…aliens…strangers…having no hope, and without God in the world” (v.12). Although the context makes it clear that Paul is writing of the ending of the enmity which had formerly existed between Jew and Gentile, it is also evident that the work of the Lord Jesus Christ had made it possible to remove the far greater enmity which had existed between them and God, “that he might reconcile both (i.e. Jew and Gentile) unto God in one body (the ecclesia) by the cross, having slain the enmity  thereby: and came and preached peace to you which were afar off (Gentiles), and to them that were nigh (Jews)” (v.16,17). 

Romans 5 teaches the same principle: “we were.. .without strength… ungodly,„sinners..;enemies” (v.6-10). Now we have been “justified by his blood …saved from wrath.. .reconciled to God” (v.9,10). In this context, verse 1 describes our present state: “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God  through our Lord Jesus Christ”. The important question therefore is whether a man has peace with God or not, for this was the “peace” which the apostles preached as being made possible “by Jesus Christ”. It is evident from other Scriptures that this state of “peace with God” will only continue if we “hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end” (Heb.3:14), and it is equally clear that believers are not promised that their lives in Christ will be a state of uninterrupted peace in the sense of freedom from strife and contention for the sake of the Truth. 

Jesus warned his disciples, “These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). For the apostles this meant the ecclesial world as well as the Roman world in which they preached – should we be surprised if we find ourselves in the same situation? 

The World’s Peace and God’s Peace 

The world achieves “peace” by various means, for example: 

  1. Repression of those who disagree with the policy of the government of the day, as witness the treatment of dissidents in the U.S.S.R. 
  2. Compromise between the disputing parties, with each surrendering some part of its position in order to obtain “peace”. This is the method by which many labour disputes are settled. 
  3. Complete capitulation by one side – e.g. the unconditional surrender by Japan which ended the Second World War. 

Peace with  God is only attainable one way – by belief and obedience to the Truth; and therefore ecclesial peace can only be achieved when all members of the ecclesia believe and obey the Truth. If “certain men” creep unawares into the ecclesia today (Jude v.4) or arise of our “own selves” (Acts 20:30), and teach “another gospel” (Gal. 1:6), there cannot be peace in the ecclesia until they have been dissuaded from their errors or separated from. Anything short of this means that Paul’s exhortations on like mindedness in the ecclesia (1 Cor. 1:10, Phil. 2:2 etc.) have not truly been taken to heart. 

There is a danger that the world’s ways of achieving peace can creep Into the ecclesia. It is not edifying to cite particular examples, but all the worldly methods listed above have been used in the 20th century ecclesia from time to time; The Scriptural way is to refute the error firmly and rebuke the errorists, with separation as the last resort if necessary. 

The Example of Paul 

The apostle wrote at least four letters to the Corinthian ecclesia, teaching, warning and rebuking them. At the end of the fourth he wrote, “This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established; I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare. Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith, prove your own selves…I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the power which the Lord hath given me;..” (2 Cor 13:1-2,5,10). Then, after such a warning, he concluded, “Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you” (v.11); As in so many passages of Scripture, the order of the words is vital – there must be one-mindedness or there cannot be any living in peace! Thus the way to the peace which the apostles preached is to achieve oneness of mind on a Scriptural basis. If division or separation from “certain men” is necessary to achieve this, these things are no more than Jesus prophesied, nor than the apostles had to do in the first century ecclesia.

References 

  1. Vol. 18 No.3 p. 107 
  2. Bro. J. Marshall, “The Future of the Body”, :100 Years of ‘The Christadelphian’, p. 36; 
  3. Bro. N.J. Smart, “The Epistles of John”, p. 34. 
  4. Bro. R. Roberts, “The Possession of the Holy Spirit”, ‘The Christadelphian’ 1883