Abstract:
Paul argues in Galatians 2:11–14 that Peter was guilty of hypocrisy because he had withdrawn
from eating with Gentiles in Antioch. Paul’s argument is best understood through the social
and rhetorical conventions related to the encomium. The problem for Paul is that his own
behaviour is inconsistent, and the Galatians know of his changed behaviour (Gl 1:13). Paul,
then, is at pains to explain how his own changed behaviour, as a result of a commissioning
from God, is different from Peter’s changed behaviour, as a result of fear of those from the
circumcision. Paul’s concern for explaining his own change in behaviour as positive and
Peter’s as negative is related to his overall concern to prevent future changes in the Galatians’
behaviour given that they are, as Paul himself is, commissioned by God for a new freedom.
