the driving forces that brought him to Jerusalem for this meeting.68 It appears that Paul was the one who made the effort to initiate this meeting with the Jerusalem apostles so that he could, “set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles.” Cousar believes that he would have gone to Jerusalem, “with a certain amount of apprehension about whether the leadership there is really subject to the gospel and whether the unity of the church can be maintained.”69
As it turned out, Paul did not have anything to worry about. The unity of the church did not break down and agreements were reached that would have far-reaching consequences for the church.70 The result of the meeting was that a division of labor was established. Paul would continue his ministry to the Gentile world while Peter and the Jerusalem apostles would continue their ministry to the Jewish world. In making this delineation among mission fields, the Jerusalem apostles acknowledged and validated both Paul’s calling and his message.71 He said that they, “added nothing to my message. On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews.”
Paul goes on to say that at the conclusion of the meeting James, Peter, and John gave him and Barnabas, “the right hand of fellowship.” After an agreement was reached, all of the men shook hands on it. This was a pledge of friendship and agreement.72 Guthrie points out that, “Then as now refusal to shake hands would have been regarded as an open testimony to disunity.”73 The shaking of hands by all of the apostles symbolized the unity of the fellowship that they shared.74
The conclusion that can be drawn from this passage is that the meeting described in Galatians 2:1-10 ends on a positive and friendly note. There is no indication of disunity or animosity between Paul and the Jerusalem leaders. On the contrary, Paul goes to great lengths to show that he and James, Peter, and John were all unified in the gospel that they preached as well as in the demarcations of their respective mission fields. They shook hands and parted as friends.
Galatians 2:11-14
When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. When I saw they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?”
The previous two meetings with Peter had ended on a positive note as far as Paul was concerned.75 This passage, however, details a confrontation between the two men in Antioch. The chronology poses a problem because Paul does not tell us when this incident took place.76 Scholars are divided over where to place this encounter when developing a chronology of Paul’s life. For our purposes, it is not necessary to conduct an exhaustive study to determine the timeframe for this passage. The most important elements that concern the chronology will be briefly touched on.
One of the first issues that needs to be discussed is whether or not the incident in Galatians 2:11-14 followed the meeting in Galatians 2:1-10 in chronological order. According to Guthrie, there is no reason to assume that the confrontation in Antioch followed the meeting in Jerusalem. He believes that the incident took place at an earlier time. Paul recalls the incident here to contrast Peter’s previous behavior with the decision that had been recently reached between him and the Jerusalem apostles. This decision included Peter.77 Guthrie makes the point that the reason that Paul even mentioned this personal confrontation with Peter was not to belittle or put him down in any way, but to establish the fact that Paul’s own apostolic authority was equal to that of even the most eminent of the apostles.78 Munck follows the same line of reasoning. Paul is not trying to establish a chronology here. He places it, “last as the clearest proof of Paul’s independence.”79
Other scholars would place the encounter between Peter and Paul in Antioch after the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.80 Some think that the incident took place before the Jerusalem Council and may have even played some part in the conflict that led to the council.81 While it may be difficult to establish exactly when this confrontation took place, the dynamics of it can be examined in the context of the relationship between Peter and Paul.
In describing the incident, Paul indicated that before the confrontation Peter had come to Antioch and participated in table-fellowship with the mixed church there. There is no reason provided for Peter’s visit to Antioch. A contrast could be drawn here to Paul’s visit to Jerusalem when he was Peter’s guest for two weeks.82 Could this have been a friendly visit in which Paul was repaying Peter’s hospitality from those early years? The fact that Peter had gone to Antioch while Paul was presumably still ministering there with Barnabas indicates that the two apostles had maintained some type of a relationship over the years.
This visit by Peter to Antioch has also been speculated to be an official visit from a representative of the Jerusalem apostles. In the same way that he and John were sent to Samaria in Acts 8 to confirm the work of Philip and pray for the believers to be filled with the Holy Spirit, so Peter was sent to Antioch to confirm the work there.83 There is no indication in Galatians or Acts, however, that this was the case. Paul does not provide any hint that Peter came to Antioch to confirm the work that he and Barnabas had been involved in for some time. In fact, according to Luke, Barnabas was the one who was originally sent to Antioch by the Jerusalem apostles.84 Ramsay also refutes any hint that Peter went to Antioch to confirm or oversee the work there.85
It has also been speculated that this visit by Peter to Antioch corresponded with Acts 12:17 where, after being delivered from prison by an angel, “he left for another place.” Luke gives no hint as to where this other place might have been and Antioch is as good a guess as any.86 Packer believes that this would have been the logical opportunity for Peter to make a missionary tour through Asia Minor, including a visit to the church in Antioch.87 Marshall also believes that Peter’s leaving “for another place,” was the time when he visited Antioch. For Luke, however, the detail of where Peter went was not important to his story, so he did not include it.88
Unlike Galatians 1:18 in which Paul told the reader how long he was with Peter in Jerusalem, there is no indication given here as to how long Peter stayed in Antioch. The only information that Paul provides about Peter’s activities in Antioch was that he had participated in table-fellowship with some of the Gentile believers.89 The word that Paul uses here for “to eat” is synesthio. This word implies a close fellowship and association.90 It conveys the idea of table-fellowship, not just the eating of a meal together.91 Jervis points out Paul uses the word in the progressive tense, suggesting that, “it was over a period of time that Peter joined Gentiles for meals.”92 Vine understands that this would have been Peter’s practice since the incident with Cornelius in Acts 10.93 Since that time, Peter had had no scruples about taking meals with Gentiles.
The type of meals that Paul is referring to here seems to be the common meal that the believers shared together as part of their fellowship.94 While there is no indication that this meal included the Lord’s Supper, that possibility also cannot be ruled out. A celebration of the Lord’s Supper was an integral part of the early church and was probably included when the Galatian believers shared a meal together.95
The next thing that Paul relates about Peter’s time in Antioch is the fact that after, “certain men came from James . . . he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles.” After some period of time in which Peter participated in table-fellowship with the Gentile Christians, he began to draw back and distance himself from them after the arrival of some Jewish Christians from Jerusalem. Peter’s influence evidently caused the other Jewish Christians in the church in Antioch, including Barnabas, to also draw back from the Gentile Christians. It is easy to see how this would have torn at the foundation of the church in Antioch. Bruce understands the human aspect of the results
