Galatians Study Week 5

Week five of Word of God Home Fellowship's Study of Galatians.

Week 5

The Antioch Conflict (Part 1)

11 Now when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was condemned.  12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with Gentiles; but when they came, he began drawing back and separating himself from the Gentiles fearing those from the circumcised.  13 And the rest of the Jews also joined him in the hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was lead away with their hypocrisy.  14 But when I saw that they did not walk straightforward with the truth of the Gospel, I said to Cephas before all of them, “If you are a Jew living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” My Translation

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.  12 For 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. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.  14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas 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?” NIV11

Comment

We now get to a defining moment which is perhaps the hardest part to interpret in the whole letter.  This “conflict” was something that the Galatians would have known about as it is inferred in this letter.  Perhaps the agitators had used this “episode” as proof that Paul had been wrong in his teaching on the Jewish Law.  If so, then Paul presents his rebuke to such a notion.

Of course the question is, “What happened after the last meeting Paul had in Jerusalem that lead up to this encounter?”  Why did Peter come to Antioch?  Why were “certain people from James” sent?

Just why Peter came to Antioch is unknown.  It was predominately a Gentile city, but it did have a large Jewish community.  If Peter was there to evangelize the Jews, then one can see just how diverse the playing field was between Peter and Paul.  Or, perhaps Peter was just on a visit.  We just don’t know.  What we do know from what context that Paul gives is that before the “certain people came from James”, Peter had no problem with fellowshipping with Gentile Christians.

We also don’t why “certain people came from James” came to Antioch, as Paul doesn’t tell us.  It is obvious that the Galatians are familiar with the event, otherwise Paul would have included many more details.  Among the theories of who and why they came to Antioch are: 

1. They are actually the “agitators” that would eventually go to Galatia and were proclaiming in Antioch what they would proclaim in Galatia.  They were “from James” as they were part of the Jerusalem church, but they were acting alone (Acts 15).
2. James sent them to Antioch to teach the “full Gospel”, and since they came in James’ authority, then everyone including Peter complied.  The “full Gospel” being that the Gentile Christians would have to observe the Jewish law in order for Jewish Christians to have anything to do with them.
3. The “certain people of James” came because of persecution was being felt on the Christians in Jerusalem from their fellow Jews.  This is documented in other letters that Paul wrote.  There was also a rebellion being started between the Jews and Rome that would eventually cause the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

11 Now when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was condemned. My Translation

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. NIV11

Paul opposed Peter “to his face”, which means “face to face”.  This was not something that Paul did “behind Peter’s back”.  He did it because Peter “was condemned”.  The phrase κατεγνωσμένος ἦν literally means “was continually having been condemned” where the participle is actually in the perfect tense.  The imperfect tense of the “to be” verb  εἰμί (ἦν here) carries with it a continual aspect.  This seems to indicate that what Peter did went on for a while.

What is most interesting about how Paul opens this part of his letter is that there is no “set-up”.  Paul just plows right through.  This is probably due to the Galatians knowing of the incident in Antioch.  As soon as it was read to them “Now when Cephas came to Antioch...”, they knew that Paul was about to comment on the incident in Antioch; something which they already knew about.

12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with Gentiles; but when they came, he began drawing back and separating himself from the Gentiles fearing those from the circumcised. My Translation

12 For 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. NIV11

One point must be noted right away.  The “certain people” were not said to be from Jerusalem; not from Judea; not from Israel; Paul says they came from James.  James was introduced in this letter back in 1:19 where he was mentioned in a “oh, by the way” fashion.  Here, James comes back into view because of the “certain people” that came from him.  Before those people came, Peter acted normally towards fellow Christians.  He would share a meal with Gentile Christians which was the appropriate thing to do. 

But “they came”, and as soon as “they came”, Peter changed.  As stated in introduction of this passage, their are several theories as to why these people came, but regardless of why they came, the impact was the same.  Peter changed his normal Christian routine for a completely different one.  From the context, τῶν ἐθνῶν (the Gentiles) are referring to the Gentiles Christians of Antioch, while the τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς (those from circumcision) refers to Jewish Christians.  It was these Jewish Christians who came from James.

Of course the biggest question is why was Peter afraid of them and why did he change?  Why did they have such influence?  Even over Peter?  We will discuss this at the close.

13 And the rest of the Jews also joined him in the hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was lead away with their hypocrisy. My Translation

13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. NIV11

The coming of the “certain people” and the change in Peter had bad effects on the Antioch church.   Here, “the rest of the Jews” is referring to the Jewish Christians in Antioch.  Paul uses this term to separate the “Jewish” Christians from the “Gentile” Christians.

Paul uses the verb συνυποκρίνομαι to describe what the the Jewish Christians were doing.  The verb means “to join in playing a part or pretending” (BDAG, 977).  The following noun that is applied to the Jews is ὑπόκρισις which means “in a negative sense, to create a public impression that is at odds with one’s real purposes or motivations”.  In Attic Greek, it meant “play-acting, playing a stage role”.  In other words, it could be that Peter and the Jewish Christians in Antioch didn’t really believe what the Jewish Christians were proclaiming.

The big blow comes when Barnabas does the same thing.  It is quite possible that the two couldn’t recover from this.  In Acts 15:36-41, Paul and Barnabas separate.  Luke’s account states that it was over John Mark, but one has to wonder if this episode in Antioch had anything to do with it.  

In the Acts account in Chapter 15, Luke doesn’t explain everything that went down in Antioch.  If fact, one could say that he left out a great deal in order to make the event seem less harsh.  In Acts, Barnabas joins Paul to go down to the Jerusalem council and there is no mention of Peter what so ever.  We do find out in Acts that the Jewish Christians were Pharisees.  This may actually set up Paul’s opening statement on justification by faith/belief in Jesus in 2:15-21 which we will discuss next week.

14 But when I saw that they did not walk straightforward with the truth of the Gospel, I said to Cephas before all of them, “If you are a Jew living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” My Translation

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas 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?” NIV11

From the context, it would seem that perhaps Paul was not in Antioch when the hypocrisy started.  Paul uses the verb ὀρθοποδέω which means “to walk straight”.  We would probably say “to walk a straight line” today.

Paul publicly confronts Peter because there was no doubt that Peter was wrong in what he did.  So why Peter?  Peter would have/should have been considered prime members of the Jerusalem Church.  For Peter to get carried away with hypocrisy was a devastation to those Gentile Christians in Antioch.  We see in Acts 15 where Judas and Silas comforted and strengthened them “for some days”.  

Paul states his point, but we are unsure who was considered the winner.  If one looks at the Acts account, Peter is the first to stand up against the Pharisees.  So, perhaps Paul’s very public reprimand pays off. 

Conclusion

Based upon the limited knowledge of what actually happened in Antioch, both here and in the Acts account, we are left on the outside trying to look in.  What is clear is that Paul uses the event to defend himself against what his opponents have said about him.  What is unclear is to why Peter did what he did and why he was afraid of the people from “James” and what was going on with James.

I’ll provide a possible solution to this.  It is quite possible that Paul has been setting up James, Jesus’ brother up until now.  There is no doubt that James had become a force in the Jerusalem Church and had become the leader of it.  This was either due to Peter doing more missionary work outside of Judea, or due to James being the half brother of Jesus.  It is probably the latter.  It would have been very hard to oppose Jesus’ own brother.

It is that James was Jesus’ brother that may have lead to his authority to the extent that even Peter became afraid of him.  Peter was probably afraid for his reputation in the Jerusalem church if it seemed that he was defying James’ wishes. 

As I've said, it is possible that Paul has been pointing James out this whole time.  Here’s how he could have done it.  Remember, this is just my musings.

1. In 1:1, Paul says that he wasn’t sent by men and he didn’t become an apostle “through/by a man”.  Why would Paul use the singular form of ἄνθρωπος here if he were not referring to a certain person?
2. In 1:19 Paul states ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου (Now I didn’t see any “other/different” apostles except for James, the Lord’s brother).  In Greek, it is “different of the Apostles”.  Let’s look at Paul’s use of ἕτερος (another of a different kind) and ἄλλος (another of the same kind).  Paul has already used both ἕτερος and ἄλλος in 1:6-7; “a different Gospel”; not that there is another.  Some Greek scholars say that this means that Paul using the words to mean the same thing, but that doesn’t seem to be the case in 1 Corinthians 12 where he uses it to separate groups of gifts.  Therefore, is James a “different” apostle?
3. In 2:9, Paul places James first in line with Peter and John.  There is no doubt that he does this because James is the leader of the Jerusalem church, but could it also be that Paul is pointing out something else that comes to a head in 2:12
4. Finally in 2:12, “they came from James”.  It is quite possible that Paul is singling out James to be the ultimate one responsible for what happened both in Antioch and in Galatia even though the Acts 15 account says in the letter sent to Antioch that it was not authorized by the Apostles in Jerusalem.

I am not the only one who holds this view.  I think that scholars tend to not want to show that everything was not perfect among the early leaders of the Christian Church.  I actually think that the conflicts that happen really brings the Gospel to life!  These were real people with real problems who had different views in the early Christian movement.  Many times we place these people on very high platforms, and we should, but they were as human as we are.

I want to leave you with Peter’s words from Acts 15.

Acts 15:6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question.  7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.  8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us.  9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.  10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?  11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” NIV11

Interestingly enough, this sounds like something Paul would say.  Peter had to stand up first as Peter had to redeem himself.  This will continue next week!