Galatians 2:11

But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. PETER - `Cephas' in the oldest manuscripts Paul's withstanding Peter proves the independence of Paul's apostleship in relation to the other apostles, and upsets Peter's alleged supremacy. The apostles were not always inspired; but were so always in writing the Scriptures. If, then, the inspired men who wrote them were not at other times infallible, much less were the uninspired men who kept them. The Christian fathers may be trusted as witnesses to facts, but not implicitly followed in matters of opinion. COME TO ANTIOCH - then the citadel of the Gentile church, where first the Gospel was preached to idolatrous Gentiles, and the name "Christians" was first given (Acts 11:20;...

11._When Peter was come_. Whoever will carefully examine all the circumstances, will, I trust, agree with me in thinking, that this happened before the apostles had decided that the Gentiles should receive no annoyance about ceremonial observances. (Acts 15:28.) For Peter would have entertained no dread of offending James, or those sent by him, after that decision had been passed: but such was the dissimulation of Peter, that, in opposing it, Paul was driven to assert “the truth of the gospel.” At first he said, that the certainty of his gospel does not in any degree depend on Peter and the apostles, so as to stand or fall by their judgment. Secondly, he said, that it had been approved by all without any exception or contradiction, and particularly by those who were universally admitted to hold the highest place. Now, as I have said, he goes further, and asserts that he had blamed Pe

11-14 Notwithstanding Peter's character, yet, when Paul saw him acting so as to hurt the truth of the gospel and the peace of the church, he was not afraid to reprove him. When he saw that Peter and the others did not live up to that principle which the gospel taught, and which they professed, namely, That by the death of Christ the partition wall between Jew and Gentile was taken down, and the observance of the law of Moses was no longer in force; as Peter's offence was public, he publicly reproved him. There is a very great difference between the prudence of St. Paul, who bore with, and used for a time, the ceremonies of the law as not sinful, and the timid conduct of St. Peter, who, by withdrawing from the Gentiles, led others to think that these ceremonies were necessary....

Verse 11. _WHEN PETER WAS COME TO ANTIOCH_] There has been a controversy whether πετρος, _Peter_, here should not be read κηφας, _Kephas_; and whether this _Kephas_ was not a _different person_ from _Peter_ the _apostle_. This controversy has lasted more than 1500 years, and is not yet settled. Instead of πετρος, _Peter_, ABCH, several others of good note, with the _Syriac, Erpenian, Coptic,_ _Sahidic, AEthiopic, Armenian_, later _Syriac_ in the margin, _Vulgate,_ and several of the Greek _fathers_, read κηφας. But whichsoever of these readings we adopt, the controversy is the same; for the great question is, whether this _Peter_ or _Kephas_, no matter which name we adopt, be the same with _Peter the apostle_? I shall not introduce the arguments _pro_ and _con_, which may be all seen in Calmet's dissertation on the subject, but just mention the side where the stren

BUT WHEN PETER WAS COME TO ANTIOCH - On the situation of Antioch, see the note at Acts 11:19. The design for which Paul introduces this statement here is evident. It is to show that he regarded himself as on a level with the chief apostles, and that he did not acknowledge his inferiority to any of them. Peter was the oldest, and probably the most honored of the apostles. Yet Paul says that he did not hesitate to resist him in a case where Peter was manifestly wrong, and thus showed that he was an apostle of the same standing as the others. Besides, what he said to Peter on that occasion was exactly pertinent to the strain of the argument which he was pursuing with the Galatians, and he therefore introduces it Galatians 2:14 to show that he had held the same doctrine all along

EXPOSITION In the preceding chapter, St. Paul has been concerned to make clear the position that neither the gospel which he preached nor the commission which he held was derived from the older apostles- the history of the first years of his ministry showed this. The apostle is now addressing himself to a different subject; he wishes to show that his gospel, though not derived from the older apostles, had, however, while recognized as standing on an independent footing, received the sanction of their approval. This being his object, he had no occasion to refer in any way to visits which he may have made to Jerusalem between the one mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and the one here referred to. The tenor of his argument, therefore, so far, does not of itself determine whether this visit was either the one mentioned in...

BUT WHEN PETER WAS COME TO ANTIOCH,.... The Alexandrian copy, and others, and the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, instead of "Peter", read "Cephas", who, by some ancient writers, is said to be not Peter the Apostle, named Cephas by Christ, but one of the seventy disciples. So Clemens h says, that Cephas, of whom Paul speaks, that when he came to Antioch he withstood him to his face, was one of the seventy disciples who had the same name with Peter the Apostle: and Jerom says i that there were some who were of opinion, that Cephas, of whom Paul writes that he withstood him to his face, was not the Apostle Peter, but one of the seventy disciples called by that name: but without any manner of foundation; for the series of the discourse, and the connection of the words, most clearly show, that that same Cephas, or Peter, one of the twelve disciples mentioned, Galatians 2:9, wit...

Galatians 2:1. _Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went up by revelation,-_ He was sent by the church at Antioch, but the church there was guided by revelation, so that Paul is correct in saying, «I went up by revelation,» Galatians 2:2. _And communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:_ There were always some among the J

GALATIANS 2:11 Khfa/j Instead of the Aramaic name Khfa/j, the Textus Receptus, following D F G K L syrhtxt goth Marcion Marius Victorinus Chrysostom _al,_ substitutes the more familiar Pe,troj) Khfa/j is strongly supported by a A B C H P 33 103 104 181 263 424c 436 vg syrp, hmg copsa, bo arm eth. (See also the comment on 1.18.)...

CHAPTER 2 _ 1. How Jerusalem had Confirmed the Gospel Paul Preached. (Galatians 2:1)_ 2. Peter's Failure; Paul's Rebuke and Testimony. (Galatians 2:11) Fourteen years passed by before he ever saw Jerusalem again. What wonderful years of service these years were! The great servant of Christ had preached the divine message in demonstration of the Spirit and of power. The day of Christ will reveal the blessed results of these years. Acts 15:1 must be read to see why Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem. The same false teachers had visited the great Gentile center, Antioch, and taught “except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” Then Paul and Barnabas were appointed to