The Apostle Paul was upset with Peter about something he did that “compelled” (persuaded) the Gentiles to live as Jews did.
It was something that not upright according to the truth of the gospel…
And it was something that caused the Apostle Paul to PROCLAIM:
Galatians 2:21
“I” do not frustrate (G114 set aside) the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Well, what was it that Peter did that upset the Apostle Paul?
But first let’s understand what the “Grace of God” is that Paul does not set aside.
Well, it must be about a righteousness that “does not” come by the law …because Paul says if righteousness does come by the law …then Christ died for nothing.
So the “Grace of God” that Paul does not “set aside” …must be about a righteousness that Christ died for …that “does not” come by the “works” of the law.
The Grace of God must be about a righteousness that we do not have to work for; a salvation that we do not have to earn.
Here’s Paul’s definition of salvation by Grace:
Then the Grace of God must be about the free “gift of righteousness”.
But does this “free gift of righteousness” only apply to “initial” salvation …or does it continue into our day to day Christian walk.
So what did Peter do that upset Paul? …that Paul considered considered “as not walking uprightly” according to the truth …and that compelled the Gentiles to believe that they should live like the Jews?
Galatians 2:12 *For before that certain (men) came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
James (“not” the brother of John) and the men sent from James were among thousands of other Jewish Christians that had “already” received “initial” salvation by believing on Christ… but they believed that, in order to “continue” to be justified from sin, they needed to “continue” to do the “works” of the law. These Christian Jews were called the Circumcision.
Peter separated himself from the Gentiles because he feared how these Christian Jews (sent from James) would react …seeing that Peter was eating was eating with the Gentiles… which was unlawful for a Jew to do under the law of Moses.
This compelled the Gentiles to believe that, after initial salvation, they also must obey the works of the law to “continue” to be justified from sin just like thousands of Christians Jews believed and just like all traditional Jews believe (although traditional Jews do not believe in”initial” salvation through Christ).
Peter separated himself from the Gentiles as if he believed like the men from James believed…that a man must do the “works” of the law to “continue” to be justified from sin…
…KNOWING” that a man is “not” justified (made righteous, saved) by the “works” of the law …for by the “works” of the law shall “no flesh” be justified (Galatians 3:21-22).
Paul knew that Peter and the men from James had already received initial salvation, but he is still telling them that a man is not justified from sin by the works of the law.
Galatians 2:14Â But when I saw (G1492 became aware) that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all:
If thou, being a Jew … livest after the manner of Gentiles -(Peter began living as “not” “under the law of Moses” like the Gentiles because he began living as in the Grace of God; “living in” the free gift of righteousness)
…and “not” as do the Jews -(who believe that a man is justified by doing the works of the law)-
…why compellest thou the “Gentiles” to live as do the Jews?(Peter’s sudden turn in behavior as living as if he believed that a man must be justified {made righteous; saved} by the works of the law)
[16] “Knowing” that a man is “not” justified (made righteous, saved) by the “works” of the law …for by the “works” of the law shall “no flesh” be justified (Galatians 3:21-22).
[18]For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
Paul is saying: If I “build again” “the belief” that we are justified by the “works” of the law …which is “the belief” I have been destroying, then I make myself a transgressor of the truth.
Then Paul said to Peter (verse 21): “I” do not “frustrate” (set aside) the “grace of God” (the free gift of righteousness): for if righteousness (being justified; saved) come by the law then Christ is dead in vain.
Yes, we receive our “initial” salvation (righteousness) as a free gift (by Grace). But the Apostle Paul isn’t referring to anybody’s “initial” salvation here, are we. Because Peter (and the men with Peter) and the men from James and even the Gentiles (that Peter separated from eating with) had already received “initial” salvation a while back.
(Let’s keep this simple. Let’s just say “Peter”, so that I don’t have to keep saying “Peter and the men with Peter”)
Paul is referring to Peter’s Christian walk and the Christian walk of the men from James and how it affected the Gentiles Christian walk.
Paul says in verse 14: …when I saw that “they” (Peter) “walked not uprightly” according to the truth of the gospel (according to the Grace of God; according to the free gift of righteousness)
Peter did not “walk”uprightly according to he truth of the gospel.
Peter had already been saved, but, out of fear, he separated from eating with the Gentiles
he was behaving as if he believed the same way as James and the men sent from James (who believed like thousands of other Christian Jews) who believed that we are “initially” saved by the Grace of God (by the free gift of righteousness), but to “continue” to “stay” justified (forgiven; saved) we must do the “righteous works” of the law.
Paul knows that Peter and James (and the men sent from James) have already received “initial” salvation, but he is saying to Peter:
Peter, here you are behaving as if you must “continue” to be justified by the works of the law to “stay” saved (just like the way James and the men from James believe)…
…”KNOWING” that a man is not “justified” by the works of the law.
Obviously, the Apostle Paul believed that a man cannot be justified by the works of the law… before or after “initial” salvation.
This incident Peter “set aside” the “Grace of God” (the free gift of righteousness) behaving as if he must obey a “work” of the law to “continue” to be justified (saved) by separating himself from eating with the Gentiles)…
…when he should have “continued to keep walking” in the Grace of God by “continuing” to eat with the Gentiles… he should have “continued” walking in the “free gift of righteousness” that he already “initially” received)
…and by confronting the men sent from James with the truth of the Gospel, that a man is “not” be justified by the works of the law, but by the “free gift of righteousness” brought to us by the sacrifice of Christ Jesus on the cross.
This incident is not about about “initial” salvation. This incident is about the Christian walk after initial salvation.
is “way beyond” Peter’s initial salvation. This is about Peter’s Christian walk!
This incident is about how Peter
He went along with the belief of James and the men from James that a man still must be justified by the works of the law… even though he has already received the”free gift of righteousness”…
…”KNOWING” that a man “CANNOT” not be “justified” by the law, period!!!
Galatians 3:21
[21] …for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Clearly, The Grace of God (the free gift of righteousness) does not end after “initial” salvation.
Clearly, the “Grace of God” is our “every day” walk “IN” the “free gift of righteousness”.