SEV Biblia, Chapter 2:12
Porque antes que viniesen unos de parte de Jacobo, comía con los gentiles; mas despus que vinieron, se retraía y apartaba, teniendo miedo de los que eran de la circuncisin.
Clarke's Bible Commentary - Galatians 2:12
Verse 12. Before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles] Here was Peter's fault. He was convinced that God had pulled down the middle wall of partition that had so long separated the Jews and Gentiles, and he acted on this conviction, associating with the latter and eating with them; but when certain Jews came from James, who it appears considered the law still to be in force, lest he should place a stumbling-block before them he withdrew from all commerce with the converted Gentiles, and acted as if he himself believed the law to be still in force, and that the distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles should still be kept up.
John Gill's Bible Commentary
Ver. 12. For before that certain came from James , etc..] The Lord's brother, mentioned before with Cephas and John, who resided at Jerusalem, from whence these persons came; and who are said to come from James, because they came from the place and church where he was, though, it may be, not sent by him, nor with his knowledge. They were such as professed faith in Christ; they were judaizing Christians believing in Christ, but were zealous of the law. Now before the coming of these persons to Antioch, he , Peter, did eat with the Gentiles ; which is to be understood, not of eating at the Lord's table with them, but at their own tables: he knew that the distinction of meats was now laid aside, and that nothing was common and unclean of itself, and that every creature of God was good, and not to be refused if received with thankfulness; wherefore he made use of his Christian liberty, and ate such food dressed in such manner as the Gentiles did, without any regard to the laws and ceremonies of the Jews; and in this he did well, for hereby he declared his sense of things, that the ceremonial law was abolished, that not only the Gentiles are not obliged to it, but even the Jews were freed from it, and that the observance of it was far from being necessary to salvation: all which agreed with the preaching and practice of the Apostle Paul, and served greatly to confirm the same, and for this he was to be commended: nor is this mentioned by way of blame, but for the sake of what follows, which was blameworthy: but when they were come he withdrew and separated himself ; not from the church, and the communion of it, for then he had been guilty of schism, but from private conversation with the Gentiles: he did not visit them in their own houses, and sit down at table and eat with them, as he was wont to do; which argued great inconstancy and instability, very unbecoming one that seemed to be, and was a pillar in the church of God, as well as much dissimulation, for he knew better than he acted; his conduct did not agree with the true sentiments of his mind, which he covered and dissembled; and which must be very staggering to the believing Gentiles, to see so great a man behave in such a manner towards them, as if they were persons not fit to converse with, and as if the observance of Jewish rites and ceremonies was necessary to salvation. What induced him to take such a step was, his fearing them which were of the circumcision : that is, the circumcised Jews, who professed faith in Christ, and were just now come from Jerusalem; not that he feared any danger from them; that they would abuse his person, or take away his life; but he might either fear he should come under their censure and reproofs, as he formerly had for going to Cornelius, and eating with him and his; or lest that they should be offended with him, and carry back an ill report of him, as not acting up to his character as an apostle of the circumcision. This led him into such a conduct; so true is that of the wise man, that the fear of man bringeth a snare, ( Proverbs 29:25).
Matthew Henry Commentary
Verses 11-14 - Notwithstanding Peter's character, yet, when Paul saw him acting so a to hurt the truth of the gospel and the peace of the church, he was no afraid to reprove him. When he saw that Peter and the others did no live up to that principle which the gospel taught, and which the professed, namely, That by the death of Christ the partition wal between Jew and Gentile was taken down, and the observance of the la of Moses was no longer in force; as Peter's offence was public, he publicly reproved him. There is a very great difference between the prudence of St. Paul, who bore with, and used for a time, the ceremonies of the law as not sinful, and the timid conduct of St Peter, who, by withdrawing from the Gentiles, led others to think tha these ceremonies were necessary.
Greek Textus Receptus
προ 4253 του 3588 γαρ 1063 ελθειν 2064 5629 τινας 5100 απο 575 ιακωβου 2385 μετα 3326 των 3588 εθνων 1484 συνησθιεν 4906 5707 οτε 3753 δε 1161 ηλθον 2064 5627 υπεστελλεν 5288 5707 και 2532 αφωριζεν 873 5707 εαυτον 1438 φοβουμενος 5399 5740 τους 3588 εκ 1537 περιτομης 4061
Vincent's NT Word Studies
12. Did eat with (sunhsqien). A.V. misses the force of the imperfect, marking Peter's custom. Not only at church feasts, but at ordinary meals, in defiance of the Pharisaic that this prohibition was not binding (Acts x. 28; xi. 8, 9), and had defended that position in the apostolic conference (Acts xv. 7 ff.).
Withdrew and separated himself (upestellen kai afwrizen eauton). Or, began to withdraw, etc. Upostellein only here in Paul. It means, originally, to draw in or contract. Thus of furling sails, closing the fingers. Middle voice, to draw or shrink back from through fear. Hence, to dissemble or prevaricate. There seems to be no special reason for making it either a military metaphor, as Lightfoot, or a nautical metaphor, as Farrar. See on Acts xx. 20.
Robertson's NT Word Studies
2:12 {For before that certain came from James} (pro tou gar elqein tinas apo iakwbou). The reason (gar) for Paul's condemnation of Peter. Articular infinitive in the genitive after pro with the accusative of general reference (tinas), "for before the coming as to some from James." Does Paul mean to say that these "certain" ones had been sent by James to Antioch to inspect the conduct of Peter and the other Jewish brethren? Some scholars think so. No doubt these brethren let the idea get out that they were emissaries "from James." But that idea is inconsistent with the position of James as president of the conference and the author of the resolution securing liberty to the Gentile Christians. No doubt these brethren threatened Peter to tell James and the church about his conduct and they reminded Peter of his previous arraignment before the Jerusalem Church on this very charge (#Ac 11:1-18). As a matter of fact the Jerusalem Conference did not discuss the matter of social relations between Jews and Gentiles though that was the charge made against Peter (#Ac 11:1ff.). {He did eat with the Gentiles} (meta twn eqnwn sunesqien). It was his habit (imperfect tense). {He drew back} (hupestellen). Imperfect tense, inchoative action, "he began to draw himself (heauton) back." Old word hupostellw. See middle voice to dissemble (#Ac 20:20,27), to shrink (#Heb 10:38). {Separated himself} (afwrizen heauton). Inchoative imperfect again, "began to separate himself" just like a Pharisee (see on 1:15) and as if afraid of the Judaizers in the Jerusalem Church, perhaps half afraid that James might not endorse what he had been doing. {Fearing them that were of the circumcision} (foboumenos tous ek peritomes). this was the real reason for Peter's cowardice. See #Ac 11:2 for "hoi ek peritomes" (they of the circumcision), the very phrase here. It was not that Peter had changed his views from the Jerusalem resolutions. It was pure fear of trouble to himself as in the denials at the trial of Christ.
