>> However, I’ve quite enjoyed dialog. <<
Thanks. I have, too. In fact, you’ve inspired a Vanity/FAQ.
>> Peter as a fellow believer in error. <<
But Peter wasn’t a believer in the error! Paul calls him a “hypocrite” and “self-condemned” because Peter had promulgated the very doctrine Paul was asserting to him. Peter was just being weak-willed... again. He knew better, and that’s why Paul upbraids him, not James.
>> The incident between Paul and Peter mentioned by Paul in Galatians is an entirely different story. <<
I’m not sure whether it’s entirely different or not. They both are Peter going along with James’ judaizing. Whether they are two separate incidents, or merely different highlights of the same incident, I believe is unknowable. The point stands, however.
>> The dispute became so great that a bunch of them (including Paul and Barnabas) went to Jerusalem (not Rome) to the Apostles and elders to sort the matter out. <<
Did I slip and say Rome?
>> I never said that I believed James had authority beyond possibly being an elder in the church of Jerusalem (BTW, we’re not even sure that this is the same James who was an Apostle. However, I personally believe it is). <<
It would appear to be James the Lesser, brother of Juda (Luke 6:16), brother of John (Matthew 10:2), son of Zebedee (Matthew 10:2, Mathew 27:56) and of Mary (Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40), and therefore also brother of Joses/Joseph (Matthew 27:56, Mark 15:40). This Mary was Jesus’ aunt. John says, “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.” (John 19:25) (King James added in “the wife of,” which does not appear in any ancient text.)
So, this James the Lesser, was therefore a cousin of Jesus.
(Yes, Jesus did have cousins named James, Juda, Joses, and Simon, who also had an aunt named Mary.)
And that makes him also, likely, the “adelphos” of Jesus who wrote the Letter of James.
placemarker
Are you saying Peter wasn't a believer, or that he wasn't in error? Me thinks we are not on the same train, and clarifications are needed.
I’m not sure whether it’s entirely different or not.
With this one, I'm pretty sure we're on different trains. I was merely pointing out that the two stories are different incidents. Although, now that you've mentioned it, I don't think there's a parallel lesson.
They both are Peter going along with James’ judaizing.
I don't get where you're finding James at fault. In the story from Acts, James demonstrates wisdom in his advice. He is to be commended and respected.
In the second story from Galatians it was the "men who came from James" whom Peter withdrew from the Gentiles to eat with in the manner of a Jew. There is no mention that they acted badly on the order of James. Paul doesn't point a finger at James, he merely mentions the origin of these men. Paul doesn't even point a finger at these "men from James". He blames Peter. Later, he mentions that Peter's (Apostolic) influence spread to the "rest of the Jews". Clearly Peter and these "rest of the Jews" were in error. We might surmise that thes "men from James" were also in error, and that James, himself, is in error. Both of these are inference-based assumptions that might be true, but might be wrong, too. The Scripture just doesn't say.
Paul's inclusion of this matter in his letter to the Galatians certainly lends credibility to Peter's prominent standing with the early believers, but we already knew that. It also demonstrates that even a man as prominent as Peter is capable of sin.
The story demonstrates a third piece of information about Peter. Even though Peter has been empowered by and with the Holy Spirit, walked with the Lord, and was capable of great miracles, he still had the same problems as before (to a lesser extent to be sure). Remember when Peter was warming himself by the fire in the high priest's courtyard and denied the Lord three times? Didn't he also succumb to the pressure he felt from those around him?
One of Peter's basic human flaws was a lack of personal confidence to take a firm stand, come what may. Praise God for His continual work within each of us. And for Peter, that meant the development of the faith and courage to take a stand so firm that he would rather be crucified upside down than to be moved.
Did I slip and say Rome?
I just couldn't resist demonstrating that the core of the early believers was Jerusalem, and not Rome. God's still working with me, too.
It would appear to be James the Lesser, brother of...
We know of three individual Jameses mentioned in the New Testament. It's been a while for me, but I believe that James son of Zebedee had already been martyred. I admit that I don't know which one this is.
Also, I'll refrain from taking the dialog down the "James was Jesus' brother not cousin" road. We're not likely to settle the "Peter wasn't a pope" issue that we started; I see no reason to dive into the whole Mary thing, too.