Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Galatians 2:10

"only [they would] that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do." — Galatians 2:10 (ASV)

Paul had already shown a concern for the poor at the time of the famine visit when he traveled to Jerusalem with Barnabas as a representative of the church at Antioch (Acts 11:27–30). At the time of the council he was reminded of this good work and encouraged to pursue it. Out of this request, with which he was in great sympathy, arose the collection from among the Gentile churches that occupied so large a part in Paul’s later thought and writings (cf. Acts 24:17; Romans 15:26; 1 Corinthians 16:1–4; 2 Corinthians 8–9). The change from the plural first person (“we”) to the singular (“I”) may reflect Paul and Barnabas’s parting company by the time the collection was actually taken up .

The account of the Jerusalem Council is followed immediately by another historical incident, the last in Paul’s series, in which he dramatically supports his claim to possess an authority equal to and independent of the other apostles. In the opening part of this chapter, Paul has demonstrated his essential unity with those who were apostles before him. Now he shows that he stood so firmly grounded in the Gospel that he opposed even Peter, contradicting him publicly when Peter’s conduct at Antioch threatened to compromise that Gospel.

For some reason, Peter had left the Jewish community at Jerusalem and had gone to the Gentile city of Antioch in Syria. There he discovered a community of Jewish and Gentile Christians living together and, in particular, eating together in apparent disregard of Jewish dietary customs. This was probably against the practice then prevailing in Jerusalem even after the council, but God had already shown Peter what he was to do in such situations . So Peter joined with other Jews for some time in eating with his Gentile brothers. In this decision, he went beyond the letter of the decrees of the council, for though the council had acknowledged the right of freedom from the law for Gentiles, it had nevertheless retained the observance of the law for Jews. Now Peter was declaring that the Jew as well as the Gentile was free from Mosaic legislation.

After a time, some influential Jews arrived in Antioch from Jerusalem, claiming to represent James. They were the legalists, and Peter’s practice shocked them. Not only was his conduct not required by the Jerusalem agreement, they might have argued, it was actually contrary to it. These persons brought such pressure to bear on Peter that he gradually detached himself from the Gentile fellowship and began to eat with Jews only. Moreover, his conduct drew others away with him, so that when Paul returned to Antioch from wherever he had gone, he found a church divided and the Gentiles under an unwarranted pressure either to accept the division or to conform to the legalistic standards of Judaism as the means of avoiding it.

What did Paul do? Since the schism was public, Paul confronted Peter publicly, charging him with inconsistency and stating once again that observing the law has no place in God’s plan of salvation. From this response, the Galatians could realize that Paul was not a self-appointed apostle, nor even a worker appointed and approved by the Twelve. He was rather a full apostle in his own right, who could therefore speak with full authority—even, if necessary, in opposition to another apostle.