Galatians 2:11–14 – Confronting Peter at Antioch
📖 Passage
Galatians 2:11–14
Read Galatians 2:11–14 (NKJV)
🧠 Context & Background
Fourteen years after his conversion, Paul went to Jerusalem “by revelation” with Barnabas and Titus to set out the gospel he preached among the Gentiles; Titus, a Greek, was not compelled to be circumcised, and Paul refused pressure from false brothers so the truth of the gospel would remain ( Galatians 2:3–5 ). The recognized leaders saw the grace given to Paul, extended the right hand of fellowship, and asked him to remember the poor—something he was eager to do ( Galatians 2:9–10; cf. Acts 11:29–30 ). This unity was tested at Antioch: Peter had been eating with Gentile believers in line with the divine verdict that what God has cleansed must not be called common and with the Spirit’s equal gift to Gentiles ( Acts 10:15–16; Acts 11:17–18 ), but he withdrew when men came from James, and the lapse spread—even to Barnabas. Paul judged this not in step with the truth of the gospel and opposed Peter publicly because the error was public and implied second-class status for Gentiles ( Galatians 2:11–12; 2:14 ). At stake was table fellowship as the sign of one new humanity in Christ—belonging and justification by faith, not by law ( Ephesians 2:14–16; cf. Acts 15:7–9 ).
🌿 Key Themes
- Gospel consistency — Orthodoxy requires orthopraxy; belief must align with visible fellowship.
- Justification & fellowship — If we are one in Christ, table-fellowship cannot be restricted by ethnic/purity markers.
- Fear of man — Social pressure can distort practice and confuse doctrine.
- Public sin, public rebuke — When the gospel is at stake publicly, correction must be clear and pastoral.
- Unity in Christ — The cross creates one family; practices that rebuild walls deny that unity.
📖 Verse-by-Verse Commentary
Galatians 2:11 — Face-to-Face Opposition
“But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.”
- Moral clarity: Peter’s conduct was objectively blameworthy—contrary to the approved gospel.
- Pastoral courage: Paul confronts personally and directly for the sake of the flock and the truth.
Galatians 2:12 — Withdrawal from Table Fellowship
“For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party.”
- Regression: From free fellowship to separation—behavior implying Gentiles are ritually inadequate.
- Motivation: Fear of the circumcision party, not new revelation, drove the change.
- Doctrinal fallout: Practice suggested Law-badges are required for full belonging.
Galatians 2:13 — Hypocrisy’s Contagion
“And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.”
- Hypokrisis: Pretending a standard one does not actually believe—performing for a crowd.
- Corporate danger: Leaders’ inconsistencies quickly mislead others.
Galatians 2:14 — Not in Step with the Gospel
“I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel…”
- Orthopodein (“to walk straight”): Gospel truth sets the plumb line for conduct.
- Public correction: Because the error publicly divided*the church, Paul publicly calls Peter back to gospel alignment.
- Core question: “How can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”—i.e., to adopt Law-boundary markers to belong.
🔍 Trusted Insight
“It is ill to see the gospel contradicted by the lives of those who preach it. One wrong example may suffice to ruin many souls. Therefore, Paul withstood Peter to the face, lest the truth of Christ be darkened.” — C.H. Spurgeon
- Spurgeon emphasizes that Peter’s withdrawal was not private weakness but a public compromise that endangered the clarity of the gospel.
- A leader’s example carries weight; when it falters, others may stumble, as even Barnabas was led astray.
- Paul’s confrontation was not harshness but love for the flock and zeal for the honor of Christ’s finished work.
Summary: Faithful ministry requires consistency between teaching and living, boldness to confront error even in leaders, and zeal to keep the gospel of grace undimmed.
🧩 Review Questions
- Why did Paul confront Peter **publicly** rather than privately in this case?
- How does **table-fellowship** reveal what a church really believes about **justification** and **unity**?
- Where do modern churches risk rebuilding **dividing walls** (culture, class, ethnicity, style)?
- What safeguards can keep leaders from **fear-of-man** compromises? 💬 **Want to go deeper? Ask the study bot these questions (or your own) to explore further insights!** ---
🌎 Worldviews
- Fear of Man vs. Fear of God — Peter’s withdrawal from Gentile tables was driven by fear of the circumcision party (v.12). The worldview of people-pleasing measures worth by human approval and avoids risk. Paul embodies a fear of God, where obedience to Christ and fidelity to the gospel matter more than reputation or safety.
- Cultural Separation vs. Gospel Unity — In Peter’s action, the old worldview of boundary markers resurfaces: Jews here, Gentiles there. It was a step back toward division, as if Christ’s cross had not torn down the wall (cf. Ephesians 2:14). The gospel worldview proclaims one new humanity, table fellowship as the visible sign of oneness in Christ.
- Compromise for Peace vs. Truth of the Gospel — Some worldviews prize outward harmony above all, even at the cost of truth. Peter’s compromise seemed “peaceful” but betrayed the gospel’s core. Paul insists that real peace flows only from truth preserved: justification by faith, not by works of the Law.
- Identity by Flesh vs. Identity in Christ — The old categories (Jew/Gentile, clean/unclean) shape belonging in the worldview of the flesh. The gospel worldview locates identity in union with Christ—no one is second-class at His table.
🙋 Application Questions
- Where might fear of certain people make you soften or obscure gospel truth in practice?
- Are there informal badges (education, politics, worship style, socioeconomic markers) that function like circumcision in your community? How can you tear them down?
- What concrete habits of shared fellowship (meals, groups, service) can showcase our one-ness in Christ across differences?
- If a respected leader’s conduct confused the gospel publicly, what would loving and biblical correction look like?
🔤 Greek Keywords
- hypokrisis (ὑπόκρισις) — Hypocrisy; play-acting, inconsistency between belief and behavior (v. 13).
- phobeō (φοβέομαι) — To fear; social fear that distorts obedience (v. 12).
- orthopodeō (ὀρθοποδέω) — To walk straight; align conduct with gospel truth (v. 14).
- anankazō (ἀναγκάζω) — To compel/force; pressuring Gentiles toward Jewish customs (v. 14).
- alētheia tou euangeliou (ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου) — Truth of the gospel; the normative standard for life together (v. 14).
📚 Cross References
- Acts 10:15–16 — God declares what He has cleansed not common.
- Acts 11:17–18 — God grants the same Spirit and repentance to Gentiles.
- Acts 15:7–9 — No distinction; God cleanses hearts by faith.
- Galatians 2:15–16 — Justification by faith, not works of the law.
- Ephesians 2:14–16 — One new humanity; the dividing wall abolished.
- Romans 3:28–29 — Justified by faith apart from the law; God of Jews and Gentiles.
- Romans 14:3–4 — Do not despise or judge over food; God has welcomed them.
- Colossians 2:16–17 — Do not let anyone judge you in food or festivals.
- Mark 7:18–19 — Jesus declares all foods clean.
- 1 Corinthians 9:20–21 — Living among Jews/Gentiles without compromising the gospel.
- Galatians 3:28 — Neither Jew nor Greek in Christ; unity at the table.
- Proverbs 29:25 — Fear of man lays a snare (Peter’s withdrawal).
📦 Next Study
Next Study → Galatians 2:15–21 – Justified by Faith, Not by Works of the Law