Tag Archive | disciple

The Apostle JUDAS was probably once SAVED





























































When should we rebuke and when should we show meekness and gentleness?

Jesus rarely used strong words 

There are only a few occasions in the Bible where we can see Jesus using some “strong words” and where he called people “names”, but unfortunately these rare occasions are often used by christians to justify their own usage of strong wordings and bad names whenever they feel like using them and regardless of circumstances.   What about all other cases where Jesus did not use such strong words and simply corrected people with gentleness? If we are supposed to throw insults around us when preaching and call people names, then it’s odd that the Bible doesn’t seem to encourage this kind of behavior, and Jesus himself didn’t act that way. Maybe it’s just ONE particular sermon (Matt. 23:13-33) which people use to support their own sometimes harsh behavior when evangelizing. 

Once Jesus did turn over of the money changers’ table but this is only one example (and an unusual one) where Jesus took severe actions, and he had good reasons to be upset when these people turned the temple of God into a house of merchandise (den of thieves).  Jesus had the right to cleanse his own Father’s house.  We are never told to act in a similar way. We are not told to enter a church and grab a christmas tree we might find there and throw it out while shouting that the entire church must repent. If we would like people to LISTEN to us and IMPROVE, there are likely better ways to handle such situations.  It’s a risk that our gospel causes a stir even if we are nothing but polite and respectful, so to make matters worse by being insulting or loud doesn’t make much sense. We would risk to find closed doors instead of open doors, when we try to reach people.

It’s true that Jesus called certain scribes and pharisees (and lawyers as per the gospel of Luke) for “hypocrites” and “fools and blind”, but he made sure to explain why he felt they were so both they and other listeners would understand the reasoning and the risks involved, and so they would LEARN something. There are lots of negative things we could call a person and we wouldn’t necessarily be unbiblical by doing so, like calling someone greedy, slanderous, lazy, argumentative, proud, dishonest, etc but we would be in error if we used these adjectives without legitimate reasons and without explaining WHY. It’s not always clever to put words on what we THINK about a person – or to blurt out “you jerk” – because it wouldn’t result in anything beneficial for anyone. The idea is to make people LISTEN and not to make them so upset that they leave and miss out on important information that you might have for them.

We are told to treat others the way we would like to be treated ourselves, and if we are to be criticized personally (not in groups) we would likely prefer to be corrected privately and by close friends and in LOVE. At other times rebuke is more appropriate, but that usually concerns repeated offences and/or pastors/teachers who have committed serious sins and must be openly rebuked. Jesus of course knew exactly when to correct people in meekness and when to rebuke, but it’s clear that many of us miss the mark. With common love and respect we can get far. See below that Jesus made sure to explain the reasoning behind naming the scribes and the pharisees “hypocrites” (I left out some verses) so that all involved could LEARN and UNDERSTAND.

Matt. 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.—17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?.19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?20 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon–27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.—33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city

John the Baptiste was the first one who used the term “generation of vipers” but also John explained what he meant with this description, and so did Jesus who used the same term. Dishing out insults without providing explanations is very distant for holy men.



In another situation Jesus did not choose to say “woe to you pharisees” but gently explained to a pharisee named Simon what was wrong with his attitude. He corrected him in love without using name callings, but also without compromising. Jesus also called Herod a “fox”, and this fact is sometimes used by christians to justify all kinds of humiliating names for others. 



Also Paul ended up in many situations where he could rebuke people but still chose not to. He also warned against vain discussions, but at times discussions are profitable and Paul himself spent a good deal of his time doing so in order to convert people. We can read that he reasoned with people and disputed with them.





Acts. 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.

On March Hill in Athens Paul could have rebuked all those people who believed in false gods, but he used a different approach. He didn’t shout “Repent, all you wicked sinners” nor told them that they were a bunch of heretical idolaters who were on the way to HELL. He managed to get their attention without humiliating them, and he just informed them that they were too superstitious and then he proceeded to explain why they were off the mark. He was smart enough to start off his talk by linking their worship of false gods to the real God. In that way he did not stir up anger or caused hurt feelings but made people listen. Naturally Paul did not compromise with the truth, nor was he watering down the gospel. It’s equally important to explain to people that they are in a lost condition due to their sins, as well as telling them how they can get saved.


The Bible says it’s the one who spreads  heretical views who is the one causing a division

If you’re in a group of  “christian heretics” and you try to correct them and exhort them, then YOU are not the one sinning by “causing a division” because the division has already happened. (But of course you are responsible for correcting people wisely, if you feel a correction is needed.) As soon as christians start to teach things which are contrary to the Bible, there is a risk for divisions and if the result is that the majority start to side with a certain heretical view then they might feel that a person who opposes them is the one being a trouble maker and who causes a division among them just because they themselves are in the majority and because they are not the ones correcting/rebuking anyone. But it’s always the one who promotes falsehood (against the Bible) who is the one causing a division or strife, even if he/she happens to be supported by an entire church or a large scope of churches.

It’s not always wise to keep quiet in order to be friendly and to avoid causing a division. Sometimes it’s unbiblical to NOT correct others – and even rebuke when necessary.  We are responsible for not letting dangerous teachings spread among us. If we don’t react, there is a risk for that even more people will be deceived by false teachings and this could lead to LOST SOULS and we might get blood on our hands.  It’s not loving to tell a person that all is well with his soul when it isn’t. It’s likewise unwise to rebuke people when the situation doesn’t call for it.  We just have to pray to the Lord that we get wisdom about this so we won’t hurt people or make them feel that we are condescending towards them.





1 Tim. 3:This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;—Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

2 Tim 2:23But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,25IN MEEKNESS instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

1 Thess 2:7 But we proved to be GENTLE among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children.












Phil. 4:Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.


REBUKING and CORRECTION in The New Testament



Acts 20:28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood. For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from AMONG YOURSELVES men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to DRAW AWAY THE DISCIPLES after themselves.–31Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.

Romans 16:17-18 Now I beseech you, brethren, MARK THEM WHICH CAUSE DIVISIONS AND OFFENCES CONTRARY TO THE DOCTRINE WHICH YE HAVE LEARNED; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly (selfish desires/appetites); and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

1 Tim 5:1 Rebuke not an ELDER, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren

1 Tim 5:19Against an ELDER receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. (Note that this is instructions when it comes to ELDERS)







Titus 1:9Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake. 12One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 13This witness is true. Wherefore REBUKE THEM SHARPLY, that they may be sound in the faith14Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.




2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will SECRETLY bring in DESTRUCTIVE heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.



REBUKING and CORRECTION in The Old Testament



Ezekiel 13:22 Because with lies ye have strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life.

Ezekiel 3:20 Again, When a RIGHTEOUS man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumbling-block before him, he shall die: because thou hast NOT GIVEN HIM WARNING, he shall DIE IN HIS SIN, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at THINE HAND. Nevertheless IF thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy SOUL.


Proverbs 17:15 He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, eventhey both are abomination to the LORD




Proverbs 27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.


Cephas might not be the apostle PETER in Gal. 2:14 but another Cephas

Cephas might not be Peter in Gal. 2:14 (The first part by Bryan Davis)

Many assume that the apostle Paul confronted the apostle Peter in Antioch regarding Peter’s apparent lack of straightforwardness with the gospel. It’s no wonder they think so, because the King James Version of the Bible says exactly that in Galatians 2:11-14. Yet, there are many reasons to doubt this assumption.

Here is the passage in the King James Version:


Now here is the same passage from the New American Standard Bible:


We notice right away that the texts differ regarding the name of the person Paul confronted. Some Greek texts say that the man’s name was Cephas, not Peter, and the translators of the NASB decided that these were the more reliable. To many people, that difference poses no problem, because Peter was given the name Cephas by Jesus, as follows.


It’s interesting that Jesus never called Peter by that name again. Not only that, no one in the book of Acts ever called him Cephas, and Peter did not refer to himself by that name in his own epistles. It is clear, therefore, that Cephas was not a name Peter went by after Jesus gave him the name.

Besides the John chapter one reference, the apostle Paul is the only person in Scripture to refer to the name Cephas.

One possible place is in Galatians chapter one, and it’s interesting to note that there is a difference in Greek texts here as well.

Here is the passage in the King James Version:


And here it is in the New American Standard Bible


In this passage, it is clear that Paul was referring to Peter, because he indirectly refers to him as an apostle in verse 19. It seems to me that the KJV is correct in this case, and the name should be Peter.

Paul more definitely referred to Cephas in other places:


Paul differentiates between Cephas and the twelve. This isn’t proof that Cephas was not part of the twelve, because Jesus easily could have appeared to one of the twelve and then to the twelve together, but the following use of Cephas casts doubt on that idea.


Here Paul puts Cephas outside of the group called “the apostles”. It is theoretically possible that Paul could have listed Peter separately from “the apostles”, but it would be unnatural to do so.

We have historical evidence pointing to the idea that Cephas was not the apostle Peter. Eusebius wrote:

“And there is a story from Clement in the fifth of his Hypotyposeis in which he also says that Cephas, concerning whom Paul says: But, when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to his face, was one of the seventy disciples, one who happened to have the same name as Peter the apostle.” (Eusebius. The History of The Church. Book 1. 12)

This was Clement of Alexandria, who lived from about 150 AD to 215. He likely had access to records that no longer exist, so this is historical documentation indicating that this Cephas was not Peter. Cephas was one of the seventy disciples, though not one of the apostles.

Internal evidence in the Galatians chapter two passage also indicates that Cephas could not have been Peter. Let’s look at the verses leading up to Paul’s opposition to Cephas.


If Cephas were the same person as Peter, why would Paul change his name in mid sentence? (In this passage, there are no differences among the Greek texts.) Also, if Peter used “Peter” in his own letters to Gentiles, why would Paul use the Aramaic form (Cephas) to Gentiles? The most reasonable conclusion is that Peter and Cephas are two different people.

According to this passage, Cephas recognized the grace given to Paul, because Paul had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised as Peter had been to the circumcised. Why, then, would this fact cause Cephas (if he were really Peter) to extend the right hand of fellowship to Paul and divide their ministries (Paul one direction and Cephas the other) when it was the division itself that indicated that they ought to divide? This would have to be circular logic.

To explain this crucial point further, let’s break down this passage:


The reasons for the actions of James, Cephas, and John are underlined, and the actions themselves are italicized.

“Seeing that” indicates that James, Cephas, and John had noticed something that  happened in the past. What did they notice? That Paul had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised and Peter to the circumcised. Those things happened at some unspecified time in the past, and these three are taking note of the events in order to decide on an action.

What is that action? To have fellowship with Paul so that he would go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

But that had already happened with the real Peter. He and Paul had already made the choice to divide the ministry and choose separate targets. So if Cephas is Peter, what is he using as a basis for deciding to divide the ministry and choose separate targets? The fact that he already has made that decision? That would be nonsense.

It would be like making a decision to become a farmer because you already are one. It is a senseless, circular statement.

The decision was based on something that happened in the past, so using that as a basis for an identical present decision that cannot logically be repeated by the same person proves that this Cephas cannot be Peter.

Again, Paul had already gone to the Gentiles, and Peter had already gone to the Jews, so if this Cephas is Peter, then he would be deciding something that had already occurred. This is not sensible.

We also have proof from the book of Acts that this person in Galatians 2 could not have been the apostle Peter:


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”. And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. (Acts 14:26 and 15:2)

This is a perfect description of what was described by Paul in Galatians 2: There was dissension with Judaizers regarding the necessity of circumcision, it occurred in Antioch, and Barnabas was involved as well. This Acts account perfectly fits the Galatians 2 account, and there is no other event recorded in Acts that coincides with Paul’s account of a dispute in Antioch.

So what did Paul and Barnabas do about the problem? They decided to consult the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. Who was one of those apostles? Peter himself:


If Cephas in Galatians 2 was Peter, it would make no sense at all for Paul to go all the way to Jerusalem to consult the very person who was causing a problem. Peter was already in Jerusalem. He wasn’t in Antioch. So it seems impossible that Peter could have been the man Paul confronted in Galatians chapter 2.

Some refer to other accounts in Acts where they believe the Galatians chapter 2 conflict might have taken place:


We see the presence of both Paul and Barnabas at Antioch along with the desire to provide for the poor, so this could be the first meeting between Paul and these people and when the right hand of fellowship took place. The Galatians text leads us to believe that the first meeting occurred in Jerusalem, so it might not have occurred here, but there is no mention of the dissension similar to what we saw in Acts 15.

If the first meeting did occur here, Peter could not have been present. Where was Peter at this time? In Jerusalem speaking up boldly for the Gentiles. (Acts 11:2 and following) According to the beginning of chapter 12, Peter went to jail in Jerusalem at that time (Acts 12:3), and Paul and Barnabas left Antioch (Acts 13:4). So if this Cephas is Peter, and this was the first meeting (which it might not have been), then he could not have been there at this time.

Others claim that the argument between Paul and Peter took place during another of Paul’s visits to Antioch:


There is no mention of any dispute here or of any visit by Peter, so why should we think that the Galatians 2 dispute took place at this time? There is no reason at all except for the fact that this is the only time Peter could have been there, which carries the presumption that the person Paul confronted in Galatians 2 was Peter, and that is the idea in dispute.

Another problem is that Peter, at the time of Acts 18, would have to completely go against what he had so boldly stood for.  It would be totally contradictory for Peter to do that. In fact, throughout the book of Acts, Peter stood up for the Gentiles’ reception of the gospel. Ever since his call by God to preach to Cornelius in Acts chapter ten, Peter was unwavering in his support of unfettered access to the gospel for the Gentiles. There is no evidence in Acts that Peter ever strayed from this steadfast support.

Yet another problem with the idea that the Galatians 2 man was Peter is that Paul indicates that people who do what the confronted man did are not even true believers.


Paul questioned Cephas – “How is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” To compel someone to live like Jews is an attempt to bring people into bondage. Since Paul indicated that such people were false brethren, they weren’t true believers, so it’s reasonable to conclude that Cephas wasn’t a true believer and certainly not the same person as the apostle Peter.

The evidence, both biblical and historical, is overwhelming that the man Paul confronted in Galatians is not the apostle Peter. That man was named Cephas, likely a Jew who sympathized with the Judaizers.

Because of Peter’s faithful defense of the Gentiles and their reception of the true gospel at every turn, it is important to make sure we do not denigrate Peter’s legacy with the false charge that he dissembled in Galatians chapter two. After the Holy Spirit indwelt him at Pentecost, he was sure and steadfast. Let us honor the truth about Peter and clear his name in the church, especially among those who have so greatly benefitted from his faithful stand for our inclusion in the faith.

More from Galatians (my addendum to Bryan’s excellent article)

Yes, Paul indicates that people who act like the criticized Cephas, are not even saved (unless they repent of course). Is Paul really saying that the apostle Peter is a false brother and not saved?

Gal.2:But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: 4And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage5To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

All of the below comments about circumcision would be warnings for people who act much like the man Cephas (and not Cephas the  apostle Peter who wrote contributed to our New Testament):

Gal. 5:Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. 7Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? 8This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. 9Alittle leaven leaveneth the whole lump10I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be11And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased. 12I would they were even cut off which trouble you.

Curses against people who act like Cephas:

Gal. 1: 6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.


The answer to the above question is not “Peter did”. The Cephas spoken of in Galatians 2:14 is likely not Peter the apostle but another Cephas. 

Why did Jesus say “I pray not for the world” in John 17:9?

I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine (John 17:9) 

The above verse is sometimes used as an attempt to prove that God does not want everyone to be saved and that Jesus did not even bother to pray for all people for this reason. However, in the same chapter we can also read:

20NEITHER PRAY I FOR THESE ALONE, BUT FOR THEM ALSO which shall believe on me through their word 

The world” is often contrasted with christian believers, and often stands in relation to Satan’s dominion and to all which is evil. It is obviously not a sin to be born into this world and to live in it, but we must make sure to not live OF this world by blending in with it – or love it more than God. This present world is considered to belong to Satan and in this sense prayers for it would not accomplish much since it i represents the root of all evil. Why spend time praying for Antichrist when we already know the future result of his evil actions against God’s plans? Prayers for individuals would make more sense – that they will be able to escape the temptations of this wicked world and turn to Jesus Christ – who does not want anyone to perish. As Paul says to the Ephesians “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world”. If all things were already determined (individuals chosen for heaven or hell before the world began), then of course there would be no reason to wrestle against anyone, nor to pray at all.








Jesus is in this particular passage focusing on his disciples (apart from Judas who has already fallen), just like we sometimes focus on only some of our family members or friends in our prayers. Jesus sends his disciples on a mission to be the light of this dark world, and this of course requires lots of strength and prayers. Jesus is not giving “the world” this particular task because the world is against him and everything he stands for. The world is the reason why believers, like his disciples, need to be protected. By reading the rest of the passage (v. 2–8), we can see that those who the Father has given Jesus are those who have passed certain requirements:

  • They must KNOW the only true God
  • They must KEEP THE WORD
  • They must RECEIVE the word
  • They must BELIEVE that the Father has sent the son to the world

2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.3And this is life eternal, that they might KNOW thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.—6I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and THEY HAVE KEPT THY WORD.—8For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and THEY HAVE RECEIVED THEM, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and THEY HAVE BELIEVED that thou didst send me.

Even though certain people are “given” Jesus and thus very special, they still need to be prayed for so that they will be kept and so that they may be ONE as Jesus and his Father are one in thoughts and goals. It is not a certainty that they will be kept, and we already know that Jesus lost one of his disciples given him – Judas Iscariot. Moreover, Jesus did not pray that his disciples would be taken out of this world but he prays that they will be KEPT while still living in this world. So Jesus prayers concerned his disciples who were with him (v. 12), but not all disciples were with him from the start. In. v. 20 he continues to pray also for all those who would believe on him through their words.


Jesus also prayed for others besides his disciples, like those who would be hearing the gospel from the mouths of the disciples.


One of many prophesies in the OT about Jesus is that the Messiah would be praying (make intercession) for his transgressors:



Obviously Jesus prayed also for non-believers. If we are to believe that Jesus never prayed for anyone else but a certain lucky crowd (the elect), should we take his example and pray only for a select few? No, the Bible says that we should even pray for our enemies.


You can read verses that say that Jesus died for the whole world in this blog article