Wiersbe Barclay
"THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS"
Chapter Two
OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER
1) To understand why Paul would refuse to circumcise Titus (but then
had Timothy circumcised later, as recorded in Acts 16:1-3)
2) To appreciate why it was necessary for Paul to rebuke Peter to his
face
3) To understand why if righteousness comes by the law, then Christ's
death was in vain
SUMMARY
As Paul continues defending his apostleship, he describes a meeting in
Jerusalem fourteen years after the one with Peter related in chapter
one. It was prompted by a revelation, and Barnabas and Titus went with
him to meet "those who were of reputation". The meeting was private,
but some false brethren were secretly brought in who sought to demand
that Titus, a Gentile, be circumcised. Paul refused, viewing it as an
effort to bring them back into bondage from which Christ set them free
(1-5).
The result of the meeting was that "those who seemed to be something"
added nothing to Paul. In fact, once they saw that the gospel of the
uncircumcised had been given to him just as the gospel of the
circumcised had been given to Peter, and once James, Cephas, and John
perceived the grace that had been given to Paul, he was extended the
right hand of fellowship. They only asked that Paul be mindful of the
poor, something he was very eager to do (6-10).
The rest of the chapter describes a confrontation in Antioch between
Peter and Paul. Peter, who was visiting, at first was willing to eat
with the Gentiles; but when some came from James, out of fear he
withdrew himself. Through his influence the rest of the Jews, even
Barnabas, were carried away into hypocrisy. This prompted Paul to
withstand Peter "to his face", and to rebuke him in the presence of
all. In the course of his rebuke, Paul stressed that we are justified
by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law, otherwise Christ
died in vain (11-24).
OUTLINE
I. THE MEETING AT JERUSALEM (1-10)
A. IN PRIVATE, WITH THOSE OF REPUTATION (1-5)
1. Occurring fourteen years later, accompanied by Barnabas and
Titus (1)
2. Spurred to go by revelation, he communicated the gospel he had
preached (2)
3. Refused to allow Titus to be circumcised, as some brethren
desired who were secretly brought in to the meeting (3-5)
B. HIS SANCTION BY JAMES, CEPHAS, AND JOHN (6-10)
1. Those who seemed to be something (reputation really made no
difference) did not add anything to Paul (6)
2. When those of reputation saw...
a. That the gospel of the uncircumcised had been committed to
Paul just as the gospel of the circumcised was to Peter
(7-8)
b. That James, Cephas, and John perceived the grace given to
Paul
...they extended the right hand of fellowship to Paul and
Barnabas (9)
3. They asked only that the poor be remembered, something Paul
was very eager to do (10)
II. THE CONFRONTATION AT ANTIOCH (11-21)
A. PETER'S HYPOCRISY (11-13)
1. Paul had to withstand Peter to the face, because he would not
eat with Gentiles when those from James came to Antioch
(11-12)
2. Peter's example of hypocrisy influenced other Jews, even
Barnabas (13)
B. PAUL'S REBUKE (14-21)
1. Peter's hypocrisy (14)
a. He himself, though Jewish, lived as a Gentile
b. Yet he was compelling Gentiles to live as Jews
2. A summary of Paul's rebuke (15-21)
a. Jewish Christians realize that they are justified by faith
in Christ, not by the works of the law by which no flesh
can be justified (15-16)
b. If I seek to be justified by Christ through a means which
cannot justify, isn't that making Christ a minister of sin?
(17)
c. If I rebuild that which cannot justify and has been
destroyed (i.e., the law), won't I become a transgressor
again? (18)
d. Through the law, I have died to the law, having been
crucified with Christ; Christ now lives in me and the life
I now live to God is a life of faith in the Son of God
(19-20)
e. If righteousness comes through the law, Christ died in
vain, and the grace of God has been set aside (21)
REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER
1) What are the main points of this chapter?
- The meeting at Jerusalem (1-10)
- The confrontation at Antioch (11-21)
2) How long was it before Paul returned to Jerusalem? Who went with him? (1)
- Fourteen years
- Barnabas and Titus
3) What prompted him to go? What did he do there? (2)
- A revelation
- Communicated to those of reputation the gospel he had preached
among the Gentiles
4) What did some who were secretly brought in to this meeting try to get Paul to do? Did Paul submit to their command? (3-5)
- To have Titus circumcised
- No
5) How do you reconcile Paul's refusal to circumcise Titus with the fact that Paul later had Timothy
circumcised? (cf. Ac 16:1-3)
- Circumcision of a Jewish Christian as a matter of expediency was
permissible; but circumcision imposed upon a Gentile as an element
necessary for salvation was not!
6) When did those who "seemed to be something" add to Paul? (6)
- Nothing
7) What two things prompted them to extend the right hand of fellowship to Paul and Barnabas? (7-9)
- When they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcised had been
committed to Paul, just as the gospel to the circumcised had been
committed to Peter
- When James, Cephas, and John perceived the grace that had been
given to Paul
8) What was the only thing they asked of Paul? (10)
- To remember the poor
9) When Peter came to Antioch, why did Paul find it necessary to withstand him to his face? (11-12)
- Because he was willing to eat with Gentiles at first, but when
certain men from James came, he withdrew himself out of fear
10) Who else was carried away by Peter's hypocrisy? (13)
- The rest of the Jews, including Barnabas
11) Briefly describe Paul's main argument as found in verse 16.
- One is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in
Christ
12) How did Paul live his life, once he had died to the law? (19-20)
- Having been crucified with Christ, he lives by faith in the Son of
God who loved Him and gave Himself for him
13) If righteousness can come through the law, what does that say about the death of Christ? (21)
- It was in vain
Chapter II -- The Gospel Not Bondage to the Law
Summary--Paul's Later Journey to Jerusalem. The Object of the Visit, Titus with Him, but Uncircumcised. Peter, James and John Apostles to the Circumcision; Paul and Barnabas to the Uncircumcision. The Right Hand of Fellowship. The Rebuke of Peter at Antioch. Justified by Faith in Christ; Not by Works of the Law.
1. Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem. “Three years after” his conversion he went up to Jerusalem (1:18); fourteen years after, he went up again. If his conversion took place about a.d. 37, as is generally supposed, the visit now spoken of was in a.d. 51. At that time we find that Paul and Barnabas and “certain others” went up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this very question of the relation of the Gentile Christians to Judaism. See Acts 15. That this is the visit Paul means, is evident (1) because it is the right date; (2) the right persons are present, viz: Paul, Barnabas, Peter and James, and (3) the right question is the one discussed. The visit of Gal 1:17. is mentioned in Acts 9:22 and took place in a.d. 40. Another, to carry relief at a time of famine, took place in a.d. 44 (Acts 11:30; 12:25); and the third, here referred to, took place in a.d. 50 or 51. Took Titus with me. Titus is not named in Acts 15:2, but only that “certain other” went with Paul and Barnabas.
2-5. And I went up by revelation. Because Christ revealed to me that I ought to go. Communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles. For at least ten years he had been preaching among the Gentiles with great success, calling upon them to obey the gospel; not the law of Moses. He now explained to the Jerusalem Christians the gospel which he had preached, privately to them who were of reputation, to such men as Peter and James, so that there would be a full understanding before the public meeting described in Acts 15. Lest, perchance, I should run. Lest his apostolic labor should be made fruitless by the action of the Jewish Christians.
3. But neither Titus, etc. Though Titus, a Gentile Christian and a minister, was with him, he was not compelled to be circumcised.
4. And that because of false brethren. In the case of Timothy (Acts 16:3) Paul had circumcised him, not as a matter of obligation, or out of deference to the views of Jewish Christians, but so that he could reach unconverted Jews better, who would not listen to a Gentile. The apostles might have recommended the circumcision of Titus, Paul here intimates, not as a matter of duty, but of prudence, had it not been made an issue by the false brethren. He could not yield to such a demand without a sacrifice of principle. Unawares brought in. These false brethren were really Jews who had slipped into the church. To spy out our liberty. Really enemies in the guise of friends whose object was to take away the freedom of the gospel, and subject Christians to the bondage of the Jewish law.
5. To whom we gave place, no, not for an hour. We refused to yield to any of their demands. See Acts 15:5. Paul sternly opposed their demands in order to preserve the truth of the gospel among the Gentiles. The motive of his firmness was to make the future safe. Had he yielded a jot, advantage would have been taken of it.
6-10. But of these who seemed to be somewhat. Who held high positions in the church; the apostles at Jerusalem; Peter, James and John, who are mentioned below. Whatsoever they are, it maketh no matter. However high their position, that does not alter the facts. They who seemed to be somewhat in conference. The leaders in the conference described in Acts 15. Added nothing to me. They gave me no new instructions or authority. They had no change to suggest in the gospel I preached.
7. When they saw. They perceived that I had been sent to the Gentiles, as Peter had the leading part in preaching to the Jews.
8. For he that wrought effectually in Peter. As Christ gave Peter the wisdom, knowledge and power needful to establish the church among the Jews, so he had fully endowed Paul for a similar work among the Gentiles.
9. And when James, Cephas and John. Cephas is the Hebrew name of Peter. See John 1:42. The rest of the apostles were probably absent from Jerusalem at the time of this visit. Who seemed to be pillars. Chief men; supports of the church. Perceived the grace. See verse 7. They gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship. An agreement was made that Paul and Barnabas should have supervision of the work among the Gentiles, and as a pledge of that agreement their hands were given.
10. Only they would that we should remember the poor. Continue the collections in the Gentile churches for the poor at Jerusalem. We have seen Paul constantly active in this work (1 Cor 16:1).
Note—In order to understand this epistle and parts of others, the reader must keep in mind the two great divisions of apostolic Christianity, the Jew and the Gentile. Of the Jewish, Peter, James and John were leaders; of the Gentile, Paul and Barnabas. These leaders were in full harmony, but the two sections of the church were not equally harmonious. The Jewish Christians, as a rule, still kept the Jewish law, and hoped for the conversion of the whole Jewish nation, until the destruction of Jerusalem; one extreme wing of them insisted that the Gentiles should keep the Jewish law, also. It is with this wing that Paul comes in conflict. Here in this chapter, and also in Acts 15, we have accounts of the conflict. After Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple in ruins, and the church removed elsewhere, the Jewish Christians gradually gave up the Jewish law, and the two divisions welded into one body in which there was neither Jew nor Gentile, but all one in Christ.
11-14. But when Peter came to Antioch. It is not certainly known when this event occurred, but probably not far from a.d. 51. Paul narrates it to show that Peter had no superiority over him, as the Judaizers claimed, and as the Romanists still assert. Peter did a wrong thing, and Paul rebuked him for it.
12. Before certain came from James. Men sent from Jerusalem by James, who stood now at the head of that church. He did eat with Gentiles. See Acts 11:3. Peter had no scruples about eating with Gentile Christians, but many of the Jewish Christians did. Hence he did before the messengers came from James what he refused to do after they came, “separating himself” from the Gentile Christians at Antioch.
13. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him. The other Jewish Christians at Antioch. To change their course thus, because of fear of these men from Jerusalem, was to dissemble. Even Barnabas, Paul's long-time companion in labor, was infected.
14. But when I saw. It was time to act decisively. Antioch was a great center. It was important that no wrong influences go forth from that center. Hence Paul administered the stern rebuke to Peter which follows. Before them all. The rebuke was on a public occasion. If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles. He had, right there in Antioch, lived with the Gentile Christians according to their customs (verse 12). Why compellest thou the Gentiles, etc. Now, he insisted, at least by his example, that the Gentile Christians should become Jews. He virtually refused to fellowship them.
15-21. We. You and I. Both Paul and Peter were Jews by birth, and not Gentiles sinners. As Jews were wont to call the Gentile heathen.
16. Knowing. There were certain facts that both of them knew. One of them was that men were justified (that is, forgiven) not by the works of the law (of Moses), but by the faith of Jesus Christ; that is, by the gospel. Both had believed on Christ in order that they might be justified. For by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. This passage, quoted in Rom 3:20, is found in Psalm 143:2.
17. But if... we were found sinners. We, Paul and Peter. We came to Christ for justification, because the gospel revealed to us that we were sinners, though professing to keep the law of Moses. Is therefore Christ the minister of sin? Did Christ make us Jews sinners? No, but when the knowledge of the gospel comes, they find that they are and have been sinners like the Gentiles. Christ only reveals to them their sinful state.
18. If I build up again the things which I destroyed. Go back from Christ to Moses, and teach others to do the same. I make myself a transgressor. For thus I teach men to trust in the works of the law which cannot justify.
19. For I through the law am dead to the law. Compare Rom 7:4-6, and see notes there; also Col 2:20. When the knowledge of Christ came, and he saw his faulty obedience to the law, he realized that he was dead in sin, slain by the law. But having died, he was freed from the law, when he became a new creature in Christ.
20. I have been crucified with Christ. By faith Paul was crucified at his conversion, crucified in the flesh, died to the old life with Christ. Now he lives, or rather, Christ liveth in him. The old life is laid aside, and the new life is a Christlike life, due to the spirit of Christ. He is now merged in Christ. Live by faith. Faith is the bond that binds him to Christ and enables him to live the new life.
21. I do not frustrate the grace of God. He would do so, if he went back to the Jewish law, and trusted in it. If it gave righteousness, then the gospel was not needed, and Christ died in vain.
Note—The account in this chapter of Paul's visit to Jerusalem, and of his controversy with Peter, is utterly inconsistent with the Romish doctrine of the supremacy of Peter. No Pope could or would allow a bishop or cardinal to “rebuke him openly,” as Paul did Peter. So, too, the reference of the controversy in Acts 15, to “the apostles and elders,” instead of to Peter, and the final judgment of James, which was received, contradict the Vatican system. Indeed, the doctrine of popedom is utterly inconsistent with the whole tenor of the Acts, and the Pauline Epistles.... This meeting at Antioch is the last between Peter and Paul of which the New Testament gives record. Early church tradition, however, reports that they met once in Rome, where they were tried and condemned on the same day, and then parted, Peter to be crucified on the hill of the Janiculum, and Paul, the Roman citizen, to be beheaded at the Three Fountains on the Ostian Way. Could we rely upon this tradition it would seem fitting that the two greatest apostles, of the Circumcision and of the Uncircumcision, should lay down their burdens together and go side by side to report their work to their common Lord.
"THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS"
Chapter Two
OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER
1) To understand why Paul would refuse to circumcise Titus (but then
had Timothy circumcised later, as recorded in Acts 16:1-3)
2) To appreciate why it was necessary for Paul to rebuke Peter to his
face
3) To understand why if righteousness comes by the law, then Christ's
death was in vain
SUMMARY
As Paul continues defending his apostleship, he describes a meeting in
Jerusalem fourteen years after the one with Peter related in chapter
one. It was prompted by a revelation, and Barnabas and Titus went with
him to meet "those who were of reputation". The meeting was private,
but some false brethren were secretly brought in who sought to demand
that Titus, a Gentile, be circumcised. Paul refused, viewing it as an
effort to bring them back into bondage from which Christ set them free
(1-5).
The result of the meeting was that "those who seemed to be something"
added nothing to Paul. In fact, once they saw that the gospel of the
uncircumcised had been given to him just as the gospel of the
circumcised had been given to Peter, and once James, Cephas, and John
perceived the grace that had been given to Paul, he was extended the
right hand of fellowship. They only asked that Paul be mindful of the
poor, something he was very eager to do (6-10).
The rest of the chapter describes a confrontation in Antioch between
Peter and Paul. Peter, who was visiting, at first was willing to eat
with the Gentiles; but when some came from James, out of fear he
withdrew himself. Through his influence the rest of the Jews, even
Barnabas, were carried away into hypocrisy. This prompted Paul to
withstand Peter "to his face", and to rebuke him in the presence of
all. In the course of his rebuke, Paul stressed that we are justified
by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law, otherwise Christ
died in vain (11-24).
OUTLINE
I. THE MEETING AT JERUSALEM (1-10)
A. IN PRIVATE, WITH THOSE OF REPUTATION (1-5)
1. Occurring fourteen years later, accompanied by Barnabas and
Titus (1)
2. Spurred to go by revelation, he communicated the gospel he had
preached (2)
3. Refused to allow Titus to be circumcised, as some brethren
desired who were secretly brought in to the meeting (3-5)
B. HIS SANCTION BY JAMES, CEPHAS, AND JOHN (6-10)
1. Those who seemed to be something (reputation really made no
difference) did not add anything to Paul (6)
2. When those of reputation saw...
a. That the gospel of the uncircumcised had been committed to
Paul just as the gospel of the circumcised was to Peter
(7-8)
b. That James, Cephas, and John perceived the grace given to
Paul
...they extended the right hand of fellowship to Paul and
Barnabas (9)
3. They asked only that the poor be remembered, something Paul
was very eager to do (10)
II. THE CONFRONTATION AT ANTIOCH (11-21)
A. PETER'S HYPOCRISY (11-13)
1. Paul had to withstand Peter to the face, because he would not
eat with Gentiles when those from James came to Antioch
(11-12)
2. Peter's example of hypocrisy influenced other Jews, even
Barnabas (13)
B. PAUL'S REBUKE (14-21)
1. Peter's hypocrisy (14)
a. He himself, though Jewish, lived as a Gentile
b. Yet he was compelling Gentiles to live as Jews
2. A summary of Paul's rebuke (15-21)
a. Jewish Christians realize that they are justified by faith
in Christ, not by the works of the law by which no flesh
can be justified (15-16)
b. If I seek to be justified by Christ through a means which
cannot justify, isn't that making Christ a minister of sin?
(17)
c. If I rebuild that which cannot justify and has been
destroyed (i.e., the law), won't I become a transgressor
again? (18)
d. Through the law, I have died to the law, having been
crucified with Christ; Christ now lives in me and the life
I now live to God is a life of faith in the Son of God
(19-20)
e. If righteousness comes through the law, Christ died in
vain, and the grace of God has been set aside (21)
REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER
1) What are the main points of this chapter?
- The meeting at Jerusalem (1-10)
- The confrontation at Antioch (11-21)
2) How long was it before Paul returned to Jerusalem? Who went with him? (1)
- Fourteen years
- Barnabas and Titus
3) What prompted him to go? What did he do there? (2)
- A revelation
- Communicated to those of reputation the gospel he had preached
among the Gentiles
4) What did some who were secretly brought in to this meeting try to get Paul to do? Did Paul submit to their command? (3-5)
- To have Titus circumcised
- No
5) How do you reconcile Paul's refusal to circumcise Titus with the fact that Paul later had Timothy
circumcised? (cf. Ac 16:1-3)
- Circumcision of a Jewish Christian as a matter of expediency was
permissible; but circumcision imposed upon a Gentile as an element
necessary for salvation was not!
6) When did those who "seemed to be something" add to Paul? (6)
- Nothing
7) What two things prompted them to extend the right hand of fellowship to Paul and Barnabas? (7-9)
- When they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcised had been
committed to Paul, just as the gospel to the circumcised had been
committed to Peter
- When James, Cephas, and John perceived the grace that had been
given to Paul
8) What was the only thing they asked of Paul? (10)
- To remember the poor
9) When Peter came to Antioch, why did Paul find it necessary to withstand him to his face? (11-12)
- Because he was willing to eat with Gentiles at first, but when
certain men from James came, he withdrew himself out of fear
10) Who else was carried away by Peter's hypocrisy? (13)
- The rest of the Jews, including Barnabas
11) Briefly describe Paul's main argument as found in verse 16.
- One is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in
Christ
12) How did Paul live his life, once he had died to the law? (19-20)
- Having been crucified with Christ, he lives by faith in the Son of
God who loved Him and gave Himself for him
13) If righteousness can come through the law, what does that say about the death of Christ? (21)
- It was in vain
Chapter II -- The Gospel Not Bondage to the Law
Summary--Paul's Later Journey to Jerusalem. The Object of the Visit, Titus with Him, but Uncircumcised. Peter, James and John Apostles to the Circumcision; Paul and Barnabas to the Uncircumcision. The Right Hand of Fellowship. The Rebuke of Peter at Antioch. Justified by Faith in Christ; Not by Works of the Law.
1. Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem. “Three years after” his conversion he went up to Jerusalem (1:18); fourteen years after, he went up again. If his conversion took place about a.d. 37, as is generally supposed, the visit now spoken of was in a.d. 51. At that time we find that Paul and Barnabas and “certain others” went up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this very question of the relation of the Gentile Christians to Judaism. See Acts 15. That this is the visit Paul means, is evident (1) because it is the right date; (2) the right persons are present, viz: Paul, Barnabas, Peter and James, and (3) the right question is the one discussed. The visit of Gal 1:17. is mentioned in Acts 9:22 and took place in a.d. 40. Another, to carry relief at a time of famine, took place in a.d. 44 (Acts 11:30; 12:25); and the third, here referred to, took place in a.d. 50 or 51. Took Titus with me. Titus is not named in Acts 15:2, but only that “certain other” went with Paul and Barnabas.
2-5. And I went up by revelation. Because Christ revealed to me that I ought to go. Communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles. For at least ten years he had been preaching among the Gentiles with great success, calling upon them to obey the gospel; not the law of Moses. He now explained to the Jerusalem Christians the gospel which he had preached, privately to them who were of reputation, to such men as Peter and James, so that there would be a full understanding before the public meeting described in Acts 15. Lest, perchance, I should run. Lest his apostolic labor should be made fruitless by the action of the Jewish Christians.
3. But neither Titus, etc. Though Titus, a Gentile Christian and a minister, was with him, he was not compelled to be circumcised.
4. And that because of false brethren. In the case of Timothy (Acts 16:3) Paul had circumcised him, not as a matter of obligation, or out of deference to the views of Jewish Christians, but so that he could reach unconverted Jews better, who would not listen to a Gentile. The apostles might have recommended the circumcision of Titus, Paul here intimates, not as a matter of duty, but of prudence, had it not been made an issue by the false brethren. He could not yield to such a demand without a sacrifice of principle. Unawares brought in. These false brethren were really Jews who had slipped into the church. To spy out our liberty. Really enemies in the guise of friends whose object was to take away the freedom of the gospel, and subject Christians to the bondage of the Jewish law.
5. To whom we gave place, no, not for an hour. We refused to yield to any of their demands. See Acts 15:5. Paul sternly opposed their demands in order to preserve the truth of the gospel among the Gentiles. The motive of his firmness was to make the future safe. Had he yielded a jot, advantage would have been taken of it.
6-10. But of these who seemed to be somewhat. Who held high positions in the church; the apostles at Jerusalem; Peter, James and John, who are mentioned below. Whatsoever they are, it maketh no matter. However high their position, that does not alter the facts. They who seemed to be somewhat in conference. The leaders in the conference described in Acts 15. Added nothing to me. They gave me no new instructions or authority. They had no change to suggest in the gospel I preached.
7. When they saw. They perceived that I had been sent to the Gentiles, as Peter had the leading part in preaching to the Jews.
8. For he that wrought effectually in Peter. As Christ gave Peter the wisdom, knowledge and power needful to establish the church among the Jews, so he had fully endowed Paul for a similar work among the Gentiles.
9. And when James, Cephas and John. Cephas is the Hebrew name of Peter. See John 1:42. The rest of the apostles were probably absent from Jerusalem at the time of this visit. Who seemed to be pillars. Chief men; supports of the church. Perceived the grace. See verse 7. They gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship. An agreement was made that Paul and Barnabas should have supervision of the work among the Gentiles, and as a pledge of that agreement their hands were given.
10. Only they would that we should remember the poor. Continue the collections in the Gentile churches for the poor at Jerusalem. We have seen Paul constantly active in this work (1 Cor 16:1).
Note—In order to understand this epistle and parts of others, the reader must keep in mind the two great divisions of apostolic Christianity, the Jew and the Gentile. Of the Jewish, Peter, James and John were leaders; of the Gentile, Paul and Barnabas. These leaders were in full harmony, but the two sections of the church were not equally harmonious. The Jewish Christians, as a rule, still kept the Jewish law, and hoped for the conversion of the whole Jewish nation, until the destruction of Jerusalem; one extreme wing of them insisted that the Gentiles should keep the Jewish law, also. It is with this wing that Paul comes in conflict. Here in this chapter, and also in Acts 15, we have accounts of the conflict. After Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple in ruins, and the church removed elsewhere, the Jewish Christians gradually gave up the Jewish law, and the two divisions welded into one body in which there was neither Jew nor Gentile, but all one in Christ.
11-14. But when Peter came to Antioch. It is not certainly known when this event occurred, but probably not far from a.d. 51. Paul narrates it to show that Peter had no superiority over him, as the Judaizers claimed, and as the Romanists still assert. Peter did a wrong thing, and Paul rebuked him for it.
12. Before certain came from James. Men sent from Jerusalem by James, who stood now at the head of that church. He did eat with Gentiles. See Acts 11:3. Peter had no scruples about eating with Gentile Christians, but many of the Jewish Christians did. Hence he did before the messengers came from James what he refused to do after they came, “separating himself” from the Gentile Christians at Antioch.
13. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him. The other Jewish Christians at Antioch. To change their course thus, because of fear of these men from Jerusalem, was to dissemble. Even Barnabas, Paul's long-time companion in labor, was infected.
14. But when I saw. It was time to act decisively. Antioch was a great center. It was important that no wrong influences go forth from that center. Hence Paul administered the stern rebuke to Peter which follows. Before them all. The rebuke was on a public occasion. If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles. He had, right there in Antioch, lived with the Gentile Christians according to their customs (verse 12). Why compellest thou the Gentiles, etc. Now, he insisted, at least by his example, that the Gentile Christians should become Jews. He virtually refused to fellowship them.
15-21. We. You and I. Both Paul and Peter were Jews by birth, and not Gentiles sinners. As Jews were wont to call the Gentile heathen.
16. Knowing. There were certain facts that both of them knew. One of them was that men were justified (that is, forgiven) not by the works of the law (of Moses), but by the faith of Jesus Christ; that is, by the gospel. Both had believed on Christ in order that they might be justified. For by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. This passage, quoted in Rom 3:20, is found in Psalm 143:2.
17. But if... we were found sinners. We, Paul and Peter. We came to Christ for justification, because the gospel revealed to us that we were sinners, though professing to keep the law of Moses. Is therefore Christ the minister of sin? Did Christ make us Jews sinners? No, but when the knowledge of the gospel comes, they find that they are and have been sinners like the Gentiles. Christ only reveals to them their sinful state.
18. If I build up again the things which I destroyed. Go back from Christ to Moses, and teach others to do the same. I make myself a transgressor. For thus I teach men to trust in the works of the law which cannot justify.
19. For I through the law am dead to the law. Compare Rom 7:4-6, and see notes there; also Col 2:20. When the knowledge of Christ came, and he saw his faulty obedience to the law, he realized that he was dead in sin, slain by the law. But having died, he was freed from the law, when he became a new creature in Christ.
20. I have been crucified with Christ. By faith Paul was crucified at his conversion, crucified in the flesh, died to the old life with Christ. Now he lives, or rather, Christ liveth in him. The old life is laid aside, and the new life is a Christlike life, due to the spirit of Christ. He is now merged in Christ. Live by faith. Faith is the bond that binds him to Christ and enables him to live the new life.
21. I do not frustrate the grace of God. He would do so, if he went back to the Jewish law, and trusted in it. If it gave righteousness, then the gospel was not needed, and Christ died in vain.
Note—The account in this chapter of Paul's visit to Jerusalem, and of his controversy with Peter, is utterly inconsistent with the Romish doctrine of the supremacy of Peter. No Pope could or would allow a bishop or cardinal to “rebuke him openly,” as Paul did Peter. So, too, the reference of the controversy in Acts 15, to “the apostles and elders,” instead of to Peter, and the final judgment of James, which was received, contradict the Vatican system. Indeed, the doctrine of popedom is utterly inconsistent with the whole tenor of the Acts, and the Pauline Epistles.... This meeting at Antioch is the last between Peter and Paul of which the New Testament gives record. Early church tradition, however, reports that they met once in Rome, where they were tried and condemned on the same day, and then parted, Peter to be crucified on the hill of the Janiculum, and Paul, the Roman citizen, to be beheaded at the Three Fountains on the Ostian Way. Could we rely upon this tradition it would seem fitting that the two greatest apostles, of the Circumcision and of the Uncircumcision, should lay down their burdens together and go side by side to report their work to their common Lord.