Replies

Yes, it was a doctrinal issue that was resolved at the Council of Jerusalem. The Protestant view is that Peter made his case and that James decided the issue. The Catholic view is that Peter laid out the doctrine and James implemented it. So when people come from James and induce Peter into sinning, does he complain to James? No! He complains to PETER... because Peter has authority over James and should have told James’ people to shove off!

He complains to PETER... because Peter has authority over James and should have told James’ people to shove off!

Paul confronted Peter because Peter was being the hypocrite. That action has nothing to say about the relative authority of James or Peter, just the sin of Peter. Why involve James if the problem gets fixed with a direct communication?

I have always been curious about his incident which raises a question: What would happen today if a Cardinal were to publicly dress-down the Pope like Paul did Peter?

Peter has authority over James and should have told James’ people to shove off!

1 Peter 5:1Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed

Acts 10:…25When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. 26But Peter raised him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am just a man."

Peter did not think he was "pope", nor did the rest of the church

Gal:4 9and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.…

Note that there was agreement that Peter was the apostle to the Jews, and Paul to the gentiles ....

James, as the Bishop of Jerusalem , ( the seat of the new church) was charged with calling the first church council ... Peter was a part of the problem.. opps so much for "infallible"

The Protestant view is that Peter made his case and that James decided the issue. The Catholic view is that Peter laid out the doctrine and James implemented it. That is absurd, as while Peter gave his testimony as to what God did, and affirmed the evangelical gospel of grace, of God purifying hearts by faith before it was confessed in baptism, and who thus exhorted the elders not to place the Gentiles under the whole Law (which Paul already held to), yet it was James who actually explained and provided Scriptural substantiation for how this could be, and then provided the final judgment, confirmatory of Peter and Paul, and while was the final word which settled the matter. p> So when people come from James and induce Peter into sinning, does he complain to James? No! He complains to PETER... because Peter has authority over James and should have told James’ people to shove off!

That is also wishful RC eisegesis, as the text does not say James would not eat with the Gentiles, or even that he was present at in Antioch (versus Jerusalem), only that some came from James and Peter was fearful of their opinion, and led others to sin by his denial of the gospel. Thus as Peter was the one separated from valid brethren, after affirming they were, then he was blamed. And as Barnabas also is indicted by Paul, had James been present and done so then he also would have been mentioned by Paul in his reproof.

In addition, there is zero intimation that Peter exercised authority over James, though Peter was the initial leader (but not as the autocratic Roman Caesario papacy), and in fact Peter is listed second after James and before John in Gal. 2:9. Those are the facts.