Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Galatians 2:6

"But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man`s person)-- they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me:" — Galatians 2:6 (ASV)

As in v.4, the construction is again broken, with the result that the first few words (followed by an interjection concerning God’s refusal to judge by appearances) are left hanging. Undoubtedly, Paul intended to revert to the subject of v.2 in order to point out that, having laid before the pillar apostles the Gospel he had been preaching, they found it to be in accordance with the truth. But Paul’s thought is interrupted, and he hastens to add that whatever the historical advantages of the original apostles might have been in that they knew the historical Jesus, this was not important either to him or to God—and they added nothing to his message.

Three times in this chapter (vv.2, 6, 9) Paul refers to the three major figures at Jerusalem in an unusual way. The persons in question are James, Peter, and John (v.9), described as “those who seemed to be leaders,” “those who seemed to be important,” and “those reputed to be pillars.” Why this unusual and perhaps even deferential way of referring to them? Though not all commentators agree, it does seem as if Paul is making a real (though balanced) note of disparagement of these three apostles. The very repetition of the phrase seems ominous, in the same way as Antony’s repetition of the word “honorable” concerning Brutus in his eulogy at Julius Caesar’s funeral in Shakespeare’s play makes the conspirators seem dishonorable. Furthermore, each occurrence of the phrase seems to grow stronger with each repetition. Third, the story of Peter’s conduct at Antioch in vv.11–14 lends credence to the feeling that Paul is disappointed with the conduct of those who should have been leaders in this great crisis of faith and doctrine but who failed to take the lead.

In other words, the delicate situation lying behind these verses explains the movement of Paul’s thought. Paul is torn between a desire to stress the basic unity that did exist between himself and the Twelve and the need to be honest in indicating that, so far as he was concerned, the apostles did not perform well in the crisis. Thus, his initial allusion to the apostles in v.2 seems to him on second thought to be too vague. He breaks in with the Titus incident, but again not indicating clearly enough that it was the apostles who for the sake of harmony were urging that Titus be circumcised. Finally, Paul picks up the matter of the apostles again (v.6) and eventually names them (v.9), this time indicating that those who were reported to be “pillars” almost failed to do the work of supporting the Gospel.

Paul has therefore done the following: (1) recognized the position and authority of the Jerusalem apostles without diminishing his own authority in the slightest; (2) indicated, in opposition to the exaggerated claims about them made by the legalizers, that the apostles were men after all and hence not always perfect in their conduct; (3) decisively separated the Gospel and policies of the Twelve, for all their weaknesses, from the Gospel and policies of the legalizers; and (4) taken note of the fact that he and the Twelve, rather than the legalizers and the Twelve, stood together. Eventually, he will even show that the agreement between himself and the Twelve was cordial both in relation to their respective spheres of ministry (cf. v.9, “James, Peter and John... gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship”) and in regard to the special obligation of the Gentiles toward the Jerusalem poor (cf. v.10, “the very thing I was eager to do”).

So far as the Gospel Paul preached was concerned, the Jerusalem conference had two results. Negatively, the Twelve “added nothing” to Paul; his Gospel was complete because it was received by revelation. Positively, the “pillars” recognized that all of them had been entrusted with the same Gospel and that they differed only in respect to the different fields they had been assigned to preach it in.