Galatians 2:10

Only they would that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do.

Paul mentioned this as a practical matter and with a view to alerting the Galatian churches that they might expect him to raise money from them to be distributed among the poor, as soon as he should have the opportunity. On Paul's final visit to Jerusalem, he delivered such a contribution to James and the elders in Jerusalem (Acts 21:17).

THE CONFRONTATION WITH PETER

The next eleven verses (Galatians 2:11-21) were written, it seems, to emphasize, not merely that Paul's gospel had been approved by the Twelve, but that in one grave particular, he preached the true gospel even when it was opposed by such men as Peter and even Barnabas. The chronology of the incident described here is difficult, if not impossible, to determine. Dummelow noted that:

Some hold that St. Paul in this passage is not mentioning a later instance of his independence, but merely another instance of it which was earlier in time than that mentioned in Galatians 2:1-10.[20]

Favoring that understanding are the indefinite "when Cephas came to Antioch" (Galatians 2:11), and the "before that" of Galatians 2:12, which may be Paul's way of saying that the episode he was about to relate happened "before" the one just recorded. This would make Peter's conduct appear to be a little less flagrant than when it is understood as coming immediately after the events just narrated. However, if it was an earlier action, it still came after the experience he had in the home of Cornelius (Acts 10), being totally reprehensible, no matter when it occurred. Ramsay also held that it is not mandatory to interpret the last half of this chapter as coming after the first part, quoting Turner and Zahn as having the same view.[21]

McGarvey wrote that "It was probably very soon after the council in Jerusalem."[22] Lipscomb declared that "I am confident that it could not have come before";[23] and Ridderbos said, "It seems to lie in the whole bearing of the context that Peter came to Antioch after the apostolic council.[24] John William Russell thought, "This was previous to the visit of Paul to Jerusalem."[25] Not a great deal hinges on the point, either way.

[20] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 949.

[21] William M. Ramsay, A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1965), p. 304.

[22] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 260.

[23] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 208.

[24] Herman N. Ridderbos, op. cit., p. 95.

[25] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), in loco.