Memphis is marketed as the birthplace of the blues and the home of rock and roll. Tourists are drawn to places called Sun Studios, Graceland, and Beale Street. Our beloved teams are known as the Grizzlies and the Tigers. Life-saving hospitals named St. Jude and LeBonheur and lovely neighborhoods known as Binghampton and Chickasaw dot our city map. The “bluff city” is identified by many words.
But there is one word most synonymous with Memphis: barbeque. America boasts four styles of barbeque. Kansas City, the Carolinas and Texas offer distinct variations. But the fourth widely-recognized type of barbeque is simply known as Memphis barbeque. Memphis is barbeque. So much so that the largest barbecue contest, the World Championship Barbecue Cooking Contest, is held each summer in Memphis on the banks of the Mighty Mississippi.
Thus it was a shock when my co-preacher Eric stated in a recent sermon that during a trip home to the Lone Star state he enjoyed beef barbeque. In the MidSouth those are fighting words because in Memphis “real” barbecue is pork. I like to put it this way: “When it comes to barbeque, if it don’t squeal, it’s ain’t real.” Thus, in suggesting that Texas beef barbecue may be superior to Memphis pork barbecue, Eric may as well have announced that Moses never parted the Red Sea, the walls of Jericho never fell, and the resurrection of Jesus never took place.
The statement was so blasphemous that it was addressed at that Sunday’s staff/elder meeting. Jay, one of the Highland elders, rose to Eric’s defense. He reminded our group that this year Memphis is also hosting a large kosher barbecue contests (translation: beef and other meats, not pork, will be cooked). He noted that the advertisements for this kosher contest end with a statement like this: “I know what you’re thinking: do I have to be a Jew in order to attend this contest?” I suppose we might also add, “I know what you’re thinking: do I have to be from Texas to attend this contest?”
This good-natured conflict over whether or not those of us who prefer real barbecue could even eat at the same table with someone who prefers beef barbecue illustrates a far more serious conflict that existed in the early church and still exists in churches today. It is a conflict that often leads the world to conclude that churches are bad news.
The clash is perhaps best illustrated by what happened one day at a dinner table in a city called Antioch:
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery— 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. 6 And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do. 11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” (Gal. 2:1-14 ESV)
Throughout this narrative there is tension between two groups of people.
Group #1 is described with these words:
- Gentiles (v. 2, 9, 12, 14)
- Greek (v. 3)
- uncircumcised (v. 7)
Group #2 is described with these words:
- circumcised (v. 3, 7, 8, 9)
- circumcision party (v. 12)
- Jew/Jews (v. 14)
Paul writes of something that happened one day regarding these two groups. Let’s imagine that it was dinner time. Peter/Cephas is present. Peter was from Group #2. He had a Jewish background. He was circumcised. And normally Peter might only eat with people from Group #2. They would not eat pork. Under conventional customs Peter might only eat kosher food with those kosher people from Group #2.
But these days Peter’s table also included people from Group #1. They did not have a Jewish background. They were not circumcised. They were called Gentiles or Greeks. They would eat pork. In spite of that, Peter’s table was filled with some of them. Even though he was from a Jewish background he ate with people from a Gentile background. Even though he was from Group #2 he ate with people from Group #1. It was a beautiful thing. Peter had managed to create this unique space in the church where people of very different backgrounds found love and acceptance at one table.
But on this day there were some people from Group #2 (having a Jewish background) who were visiting at dinner time. Apparently they were pretty important people. The kind of people you like to impress. And, apparently, they didn’t think very highly of those Gentiles. So, when Peter saw them, he left his friends from Group #1 (the Gentiles) and moved over the table where those from Group #2 were eating. Peter forsook his Gentile friends and feasted only with these important new Jewish friends.
That may seem like a small thing to us. But Paul uses provocative language to describe just how upside down this little move was. He describes Peter’s ministry as “apostolic” (v. 8) That word comes from the Greek word “apostello.” It’s a combination of two words that mean “to send to.” Apostles were were sent by Jesus to people to share the good news. Peter is an “apostello.”
But Peter, rather than going to those from Group #1 at the meal table, was now “drawing back” from them (v. 12). That phrase comes from the Greek word “hupostello.” It’s a combination of two words that mean “to send away.”
Peter the “apostello” became Peter the “hupostello.” Peter, the one sent to all kinds of people, including people like those in Group #1, was now Peter, the one sending himself away from people, especially those in Group #1. He turned his back on a table filled with beef and pork and opted to sup only with those who ate no pork.
When Peter did this, his example led others like Barnabas and other Christians of Jewish background to do the same. These Jewish Christians stopped eating with the Gentiles. The result was a room filled with segregated tables. All the people from Group #2 (the Jews) were now eating only with each other. And all the people from Group #1 (the Gentiles) were left alone to eat with each other.
This dinner division was rooted in longstanding tension between these two groups. Peter was quite familiar with it. Long before this moment in Antioch, Peter was commissioned by God to visit a Gentile named Cornelius. It took a lot of prodding by God to get Peter to go. Why? Here’s how Peter explained his initial hesitation:
And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation… (Acts 10:28 ESV)
There was so much tension between these two groups that Peter describes it as unlawful. It was unlawful for a person of Jewish background to visit the home of someone from a non-Jewish background.
Here’s how the paraphrase The Message lays it out:
“You know, I’m sure that this is highly irregular. Jews just don’t do this—visit and relax with people of another race… (Acts 10:28 The Message)
That’s what it was like in Peter’s day. People from a Jewish background simply did not visit and relax with people of another race–Gentiles. But God persuaded Peter that day to start visiting and relaxing with them. And by the time Peter came to Antioch, he seemed pretty comfortable doing it. He’d created a table in the church where people of a Jewish background and people of a Gentile background were welcomed and loved. Peter had managed to create this unique space in the church where people of very different backgrounds found love and acceptance at at table.
But when these important church leaders came in, all of them from a Jewish background, all of them clearly negative about Gentiles, Peter got up from his table and went and ate with them. He abandoned his project of helping the church to be a place where both groups were welcomed at one table.
And Paul goes ballistic. He opposes Peter to his face. He warns that because Peter did this Peter is “condemned” (v. 11). Worse, Paul says that this was a violation of “the truth of the gospel”:
“But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel…” (Gal. 2:14 ESV)
Paul uses that phrase twice in this text. Both times are in the context of a discussion about the way people of a Jewish background treat people of a Gentile background. For Paul “the truth of the gospel” isn’t some academic discussion about doctrine. It’s a practical discussion about how Christians treat people who are different from them. And for Paul, what just happened at that table was a violation of the truth of the gospel.
That is, Peter ceased to be gospel, good news. As a result, the church ceased to be good news.
It is no coincidence that Paul writes all of this in the midst of a central declaration about God:
“God shows no partiality.” (Gal. 2:6 ESV).
The phrase literally means “God does not take into account the face.” God will not base his treatment of any person based on that person’s face–based on some external criteria. He will not show love toward American faces and hatred toward African faces. He will not give compassion to poor faces and disdain to middle-class faces. God treats all faces the same.
This is a critical confession for Paul, because it was a confession once made by Peter himself. A form of that word was used when Peter, after visiting that Gentile named Cornelius, declared:
“Truly I understand that God shows no partiality.” (Acts 10:34).
Now Paul is throwing Peter’s words right back at his face. “Don’t you remember, Peter?” he is asking. “You used to believe this: God shows no partiality! You were living this out! Your table used to be one of the very best illustrations of this truth!”
This, it turns out, is what Paul means by “the truth of the gospel”–God shows no partiality. God does not base his treatment of others on their face–showing preference to faces of influential people, or faces of white people, or faces of black people, or faces of men, or faces of women. God shows no partiality. That’s the gospel in a nutshell.
Paul is defining gospel here in a practical way. Here, gospel or good news is primarily about the way the church shares and shows that God shows no partiality.
The Church’s Gospel Impartiality
And the moment Peter went from being an “apostello” to being a “hupostello,” the moment he went from eating with people different from him to withdrawing from people different from him, he ceased to be gospel. He violated the truth of the good news. And he betrayed one of the most critical functions of a gospel church. The Gospel or good news is primarily about the way the church shares and shows that God shows no partiality. It’s about the church becoming good news, especially to those who are different from us.
That is, if the gospel is that God shows no partiality, the church becomes good news when it, too, shows no partiality. When it, too, refuses to take into account any person’s face. When it too creates a table where any person is welcome, no matter his/her face.
That’s why communion lies at the very center of the church. It reminds us that everyone is welcome at this table. It becomes a visual symbol of the kind of life we’re called to live.
We see glimpses of this gospel elsewhere.
Kobi Tzafrir runs a restaurant called the Hummus Bar.[1] [PP screen shot of this https://www.facebook.com/Mhumusbar] It’s in a town about one hour from Jerusalem. Earlier this year he was deeply troubled by the violence which erupted between Israelis and Palestinians. He wanted to do something about it. But he was just a restaurant owner. Just one person. He decided to run this ad on Facebook: [PP text] “Scared of Arabs? Scared of Jews? We don’t have Arabs. We don’t have Jews. We have human beings.” And he offered a 50% discount to Jews and Arabs who would come to his restaurant and share a table.
That’s a postcard of what the church is intended to paint in life-sized murals. In a world like ours the very best news is a community that lives out a commitment to non-partiality, to not taking into account the face of anyone, as a living demonstration that God does the same. According to Paul, that’s what the gospel is. And that’s what it means to be gospel or good news in this world.
Moving From a Single Gospel to Several Gospels
But how do we do become the good news described in this text? Paul explains. Peter, he notes, had been “entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised” (v. 7). And, Paul had been “entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised” (v. 7). That is, Peter was to share and show the gospel to those who were like him, the Jews, the circumcised. But if that was the only gospel the church had, it would be missing something vital. Thus, Paul was to share and show the gospel to those who were different, the Gentiles, the uncircumcised. The one gospel was to be shared and shown through the gospel to the circumcised and the gospel to the uncircumcised.
Here’s what Paul’s saying: The church becomes good news when the single gospel is shared and shown through several gospels. The early church was not a one-gospel church. It wasn’t enough for the early church to have a “gospel to the circumcised.” That was needed. People from a Jewish background, with a Jewish culture, and from a Jewish race needed to hear that God welcomed them into his kingdom through Jesus. They needed to experience that welcome through the warmth and hospitality of the church.
But this gospel was insufficient. The early church also needed a “gospel to the uncircumcised.” People from a Gentile background, with a Greco-Roman culture, and from a non Jewish race needed to hear that God welcomed them into his kingdom through Jesus. They needed to experience that welcome through the warmth and hospitality of the church.
In order for the early church to walk towards the truth of the one gospel, they had to share and show many gospels. They had to make sure they were good news not just to one group but to both groups.
The same is true today. The way for the church to become good news in a world that views it as bad news is for us to share and show the one gospel through many gospels.
Most churches have excelled in sharing and showing one gospel. Consider my congregation. We’ve succeeded fairly well in sharing and showing a gospel to middle-class Americans. That group feels welcome and at home at Highland. For them, I think, Highland is good news. And that’s a good thing. No church can be a gospel church in America if it does not share and show a gospel to middle-class Americans.
But there are other gospels required. There are others who need to know and be shown that God doesn’t take their face into account either. There are others who need to be welcomed to our table. Churches must strive to share and show…
- A gospel to males. A gospel to females.
- A gospel to old-timers. A gospel to new-comers.
- A gospel to Republicans. A gospel to Democrats.
- A gospel to the prosperous. A gospel to the poor.
- A gospel to the single. A gospel to the married. A gospel to the divorced.
- A gospel to young adults. A gospel to middle adults. A gospel to senior adults.
- A gospel to the light-skinned. A gospel to the dark-skinned.
- A gospel to the devout. A gospel to those who doubt.
- A gospel to heterosexuals. A gospel to homosexuals.
- A gospel to the suburban. A gospel to the urban.
- A gospel to Americans. A gospel to Africans.
- A gospel to those who are sobbing. A gospel to those who are celebrating.
- A gospel to PhDs. A gospel to G.E.Ds.
In every church, some of these gospels are primary. Some of these gospels have taken root. The people in those groups feel welcome and loved and accepted. But in every church, others of these gospels are anemic. They’ve not taken root. And the people in those groups don’t feel welcome. Don’t feel loved. Don’t feel accepted. The church becomes the best news in the world when it takes steps toward that very goal.
That’s why Highland remains committed to sharing and showing several gospels:
- We’re striving to share and show a gospel to the fatherless. That’s why we’re working in two public schools, why we partner with four Children’s Homes, why we link hands with organizations like Agape Child and Family Services, and why we host two initiatives aimed at adoption and foster care. We want to make sure the fatherless understand that they have a place at this table.
- We’re striving to share and show a gospel to the poor. That’s why we partner with organizations like HopeWorks to serve the unemployed, the formerly incarcerated and the homeless.
- We’re striving to share and show a gospel to young adults. That’s why we partner with Soma Campus Ministry at the University of Memphis and why we fund a ministry to young adults in Memphis.
- We’re striving to share and show a gospel to people outside of America. That’s why join hands with the the Ukrainian Education Center in Kiev, Ukraine and a church Bila Tserkva. We want to share a gospel to the Ukrainians.
- That’s why support the Shiloh Christian School and the work of the Luther family in Bacolod, Philippines. We want to share a gospel to the Filipinos.
- That’s why embrace the Melanesian Bible College in Papua New Guinea and its effort to plant churches and train church leaders.
- That’s why we’re hard at work to start a new work in China.
We want to share the one gospel of God’s impartiality through many gospels. We’re not going to be content with being a one-gospel church. We cannot be satisfied to be a church where the only group that truly feels welcome are middle-class Americans. We’re going to share and show as many gospels as it takes so that every single person in our cities and on the planet finally and fully realizes that he/she has a seat in this church and at the table with Jesus.
Recently I met a church leader in Tennessee. I had been invited to speak at his congregation as part of a series of speakers the church brought in to help them become better equipped for mission in their community.
“We’ve really been wrestling lately with a question asked by your friend who spoke here last week,” he said. “He asked us this question: ‘If the people in your city were only allowed to have one church remain in this city, which church would they vote to keep?’ That question has convicted us,” he said. “Because we’re not sure the people in our city would vote to keep us.”
What would lead a city to vote a church in? What would lead a city, a state, a country and a world to view the church as really good news worth having? Many things. But certainly high on that list would be this: if that church managed to host a table, and share a message, and live out lives which fully demonstrated one life-changing reality: God shows no partiality, and neither do we.
So, here’s the challenge: Share and show one more gospel. What gospel needs to be taken up next by you? What person or group of people in your life probably does not know that God cares deeply for them or at least has not experienced that care through you or through the church?
- Is it time for you to share and show a gospel to people of a different race than you?
- People who live in a different country than you?
- People from a different religious background than you?
What gospel needs to be taken up by you? Share and show one more gospel this week.
And, be in prayer and preparation for our Nov. 22 Outreach Contribution. We hope to raise $235,000 on that day for about 30 Outreach Ministries. That’s about 6 times what we give on an average Sunday. So it calls for great sacrifice on our part. But it’s part of the way we become good news. It’s part of the way we share the one gospel of God’s impartiality with the many around the world who desperately need to hear it.
