According to verse 7, those in Jerusalem realized that Paul had been “entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with that of the circumcision.” It was clear that the Lord had entrusted to Paul the gospel of the uncircumcision. Although concerning this Paul was frank, honest, faithful, and bold, he was not proud. Rather, he simply realized that the One who worked in Peter for the apostleship of the circumcision worked also in him for the nations, for the uncircumcision.
In verse 9 Paul goes on to say, “And perceiving the grace given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and to Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the nations, and they to the circumcision.” In the listing of the apostles, Peter was mentioned first (Matt. 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). However, here James is mentioned first. This indicates that the foremost leading one in the church at this time was not Peter, but James the brother of the Lord (Gal. 1:19). This is confirmed by Acts 15:13-21, where James, not Peter, was the authority to give the final decisive word in the conference held in Jerusalem. It must be that James came to the forefront to take the lead among the apostles because of Peter’s weakness shown in not holding the truth of the gospel, as illustrated by Paul in verses 11 through 14. Hence, both in Galatians 2:12 and Acts 21:18, James was considered the representative of the church in Jerusalem and of the apostles. This is strong proof that Peter was not always the foremost leader of the church. This also implies that leadership in the church is not organizational and perpetual, but it is spiritual and fluctuates according to the spiritual condition of the leading ones. It strongly refutes the assertion of Catholicism that Peter was the only successor of Christ in the administration of the church.
Because Paul was honest, faithful, frank, and bold, he opposed Peter to his face when Peter was not faithful to the truth of the gospel. In 2:11 Paul says, “But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he was to be condemned.” As we shall see, Peter was not faithful to the vision he had received concerning the Gentiles. When he was in Antioch, he not only played politics, but also acted in a hypocritical manner. For this reason, Paul opposed him.
In 2:11-14 Peter’s unfaithfulness to the truth of the gospel is exposed. In referring to this, we are not siding with Paul against Peter; we are simply speaking the facts.
When I first read these verses, I was shocked. I could hardly believe what I was reading. But since these verses were written by Paul, they must be true. I found it hard to believe that one who had been with the Lord Jesus for three and a half years and who had seen the vision in Acts 10 regarding the abolition of the Levitical diet could practice such hypocrisy. Nevertheless, in Antioch Peter did just this. No wonder he lost his place of leadership. He was disqualified because he was not faithful to the vision he had seen. He did not keep the truth according to the vision he had received from the Lord.
In 2:12 we see that before certain ones came from James, Peter ate with those of the nations. This was against the customary practice of the Jews in keeping the observances of their law. If eating with those of the nations was wrong, Peter should not have done it in the first place. Since he ate with them, he indicated that it was proper to do so.
When certain ones came from James, Peter “shrank back and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcision.” The phrase “from James” means from the church in Jerusalem. This is another indication that at that time James, not Peter, was the first among the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. The fact that Peter shrank back proves that he was very weak in the pure Christian faith. He had received an exceedingly clear vision from the heavens concerning fellowship with the Gentiles, and he took the lead to put that vision into practice in Acts 10. What weakness and backsliding to shrink from eating with Gentile believers out of fear of those of the circumcision! No wonder he lost the leadership among the apostles.
In verse 12 Paul specifically points out that Peter feared those of the circumcision. This indicates that in Jerusalem there was an atmosphere that strongly favored the observance of circumcision. Probably all the Jewish believers in Jerusalem, including Peter, were still in favor of this practice.