galatians 2:11

Bible study online

Galatians 2:11

King James Version (KJV)

“In our prayers we talk to God, in our Bible study God talks to us, and we had better let God do most of the talking.”

— D.L. Moody
Galatians 2:11
Verse 11 of 21

Scripture focus

But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

Galatians 2:11KJV

Commentary

Commentary on Galatians 2:11

Theological / Devotional

Peter was come. Although Peter’s conduct (vs. 11-14) seems strange to us after his experience with Cornelius (Acts 10:19 to 11:18), and especially after the decision of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7, 22, 29), it is evident that Paul is here narrating the incident in its proper chronological order. It should be remembered that the decision of the Jerusalem Council pertained to Gentile believers only. It did not specifically release Jewish Christians from the requirements of the ritual law. Having lost their case with respect to Gentile converts, the Judaizers naturally refused to read more into the decision than was actually stated. But Paul and others rightly reasoned that if Gentiles could be saved apart from the ritual law, so could the Jews. When in Jerusalem Paul had no serious objection to participating in ritual ceremonies himself (cf. Acts 21:20-27), as a Jew. As with eating food offered to idols (1 Cor. 10:27-29), no moral principle was involved (eh. 8:8). Paul’s concern on this occasion was for the members of the church (cf. 1 Cor. 10:29-33), and the church at Antioch was composed largely of Gentiles (Acts 11:19-21). Peter therefore should have been ready to stand firmly in the position he originally took, of entering into full fellowship with the Gentile believers on a basis of full reciprocity.

This visit of Peter to Antioch was apparently made soon after the close of the Jerusalem Council. From Acts 15:1, 2 it is evident that the discussion at Antioch concerning the question of circumcision had provided the immediate occasion for calling that council. Now that the question had been settled in a way seemingly satisfactory to all concerned, it would be natural for at least some of the leaders to visit Antioch. From the record of Peter’s participation in the council (see Acts 15:6-11), particularly his experience in the home of Cornelius, he would be expected to do what he could at Antioch to compose differences of opinion and to help carry out the decision of the council.

I withstood him. This incident clearly proves Paul’s equality as an apostle and vindicates his argument against requiring the Gentiles to conform to Jewish legal practices (see v. 14). Paul, Barnabas, and two others had been chosen to carry the decision of the council back to Antioch (see Acts 15:22, 23). Because Peter had been favorable to, and no doubt concurred wholeheartedly in, the decision, it can hardly be said that there was a controversy between him and Paul. They were in agreement, at least on the general principles, and thus on the decision, laid down at the council with respect to the status of Gentiles within the Christian church. This clear and unequivocal decision doubtless provided the basis of Paul’s open rebuke to Peter, and justified it.

It should be possible for church leaders to discuss various opinions without creating feelings of resentment. It is reasonable to assume that Peter’s silence reflected his admission of having erred in judgment. This was a noble thing for him to do. Unity of effort is necessary for success in any enterprise. The church can never fulfill her commission until there is the same type of honesty and straightforwardness that was evident among apostolic leaders.

He was to be blamed. Some early church writers insisted that the Peter here mentioned was not the apostle Peter but one of the Seventy. Others claimed that the two apostles had arranged the scene beforehand as a lesson to the Judaizers that they should be as willing to submit as Peter was under Paul’s persuasive arguments. These and other attempts to explain away the simple facts were prompted by the preconceived belief in the primacy of Peter and an unwillingness to admit that he could have been in the wrong, to say nothing about his being openly rebuked by a fellow apostle. Apparently Peter realized his own error and made no attempt to justify or excuse himself. Such a reaction is in keeping with what might be expected of Peter after his great confession (see John 21:15-17). It marked him as a man of noble spiritual stature.

By SdaBc