He tells the galatians that he rebuked peter when he saw that he and the other jewish believers were not acting in a straightforward way with the truth of the gospel (gal. Well, it tells us something.
Now when peter visited antioch, i remonstrated with him to his face, because he had incurred just censure.
Paul rebukes peter to his face. Even a man like barnabas was drawn into this disaster. Peter, one of the lord jesus' very own disciples, saw the lord and walked with him for some time. Nor was his apostleship the basis for paul’s confrontation of peter.
12 for before certain men came from james, () he was eating with the gentiles; As a leader in the church, he was to set a good example for others, but instead, his hypocritical actions led others astray (other jews followed his lead including “even barnabas”)(gal 2:13) and certainly upset the gentile christians. Paul had the authority to charge him with hypocrisy before all 2.
The authority for what paul did was the gospel. And consequently, painful as it must have been to paul, he had to be rebuked. This “circumcision party” had made ethnic and racial identification an.
Paul therefore had no other alternative, if he would be faithful to the trust committed to him, than to withstand peter to the face because he was to be condemned.* peter was not, at this moment, walking uprightly according to the truth of the gospel; 11 but () when cephas came to antioch, i opposed him () to his face, because he stood condemned. Paul, however, saw that peter slipped away from the truth of the gospel of christ.
The english standard version places quotation marks at the end of verse 14, ending paul’s conversation with peter. Peter later described paul as our beloved brother paul b. Paul confronts cephas 10 they only asked us to remember the poor, the very thing i was eager to do.
In galatians 2, the apostle paul publicly rebukes the apostle peter for drawing back from fellowship with the gentiles out of fear of a jewish christian faction that believed that gentiles needed to become jewish before they could be fully included in the church. At the meeting here mentioned judaism and christianity were brought face to face. Gal 2:12 for prior to the coming of certain [jewish christian] men from james, he used to eat [the forbidden
11 but when peter came to antioch, i had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. For before that certain gentiles came from james, he did eat with the gentiles: This was the right thing to do, and it also revealed paul was equal to peter.
And by his actions, peter influenced others to do likewise. But afterward, when some friends of james came, peter wouldn’t eat with the gentiles anymore. So how does this fit with petrine supremacy?
If a brother or sister in the christ has sinned against me in a personal matter, that is between me and them and i. He accused peter of hypocrisy. But when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing () the circumcision party.
Since his vision and experience with the conversion of cornelius in 38 a.d., peter has lived in free and unrestrained intercourse with the church's gentile converts. Because of this action, paul called peter a hypocrite. Peter and paul are shown in this 17th century work by guido reni.
Publicly, paul rebuked peter face to face. The apostle peter visits the city. Galatians 2:11 but when peter was come to antioch, i withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
Just the fact that paul rebukes him, doesn’t that tell us something about peter’s position, that his position isn’t that high? But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself, for fear of those in the circumcision group.… Paul is staying in syrian antioch just before his third missionary journey.during the spring holy day season of 53 a.d.
The influence of dunn notes that paul also seemed to “change his tune” later on:“[i]t can hardly go unnoticed that paul’s advice to such communities in i cor. 12 when he first arrived, he ate with the gentile believers, who were not circumcised. He believed one thing, but did something else.
But when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them, which were of the circumcision. He regularly meets and eats with them in social friendship. But when they 3 came, he began drawing back 4 and separating himself from the gentiles fearing those.
12 for before certain people came from james 2 , he used to eat with gentiles; He did not talk behind his back. Paul continues his argument with peter, but i’m going to split that into another post, as this has already become a lengthy post in itself.
Other major translations place the quotation marks at the end of verse 21. So one possible option or answer would be, it tells us that his position is not of higher rank, that paul somehow has more. 11 when cephas came to antioch, however, i opposed him to his face, because he stood to be condemned.
 13 and the rest of the jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even barnabas was led astray by. Peter is represented as a man of larger form and stronger build, with dark eye, pale and sallow complexion, and short hair curled black and thick round his temples. Paul rebuked peter to his face.
He would not be intimidated or awe struck by those who “were of high reputation” (2:6). Paul had the authority to withstand him to his face b. Kudos to paul for having the courage to stand up to peter “to his face” (galatians 2:11).
But when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. 12 for before certain men came from james, he used to eat with the gentiles.
12 for before that certain came from james, he did eat with the gentiles: And how does pauls account in gal2 fit with the account in acts 15… was it a contiunation of the same story?