Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadBob Utley You Can Understand the Bible - Galatians 2:1 - 2:10
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gal_2:1-10
1Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. 2It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain. 3But not even Titus, who was with me, though he was Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. 5But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you. 6But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference; God shows no partiality)—well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me. 7But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised 8(for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), 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. 10They only asked us to remember the poor—the very thing I also was eager to do.
Gal_2:1 "after an interval of fourteen years" The fourteen year period has been the subject of much scholarly disagreement. This period of time may either relate to
1. Paul's conversion (cf. Gal_1:15-16)
2. Paul's time in Arabia (cf. Gal_1:17)
3. his first visit to Jerusalem (cf. Gal_1:18)
The time element is only significant to show how delayed and sporadic were his visits and contacts with the Apostles in Jerusalem.
▣ "I went up again to Jerusalem" "Again" implies the second or later visit. The exact time is uncertain, for in Acts five different visits by Paul to Jerusalem are recorded. The last two are too late to refer to this context, but which of the other three he meant is uncertain. I personally believe Galatians 2 relates to Acts 15 because in both cases Barnabas was present, the subject matter is the same, and Peter and James are both named. Beyond this author's speculation, other scholars such as the preeminent F. F. Bruce in the New International Commentary Series and Richard Longenecker in the Word Biblical Commentary Series believe that Galatians 2 relates to the famine visit recorded in Act_11:30.
The phrase "went up to Jerusalem" is theological in nature. A converse reference occurs in Act_11:27 when they went "down to Antioch." Jerusalem, because it is the holy city, is considered to be "up" from any direction.
▣ "with Barnabas " Act_4:36 provides the information that Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus whose name was Joseph. The disciples nicknamed him Barnabas meaning "son of encouragement." He was the first one to accept Paul's conversion (cf. Act_11:24). He was obviously a leader in the Jerusalem Church (cf. Act_11:22) as was Silas (cf. Act_15:22). He went to Tarsus and searched for Saul to get him to help with the work in Antioch (cf. Act_11:19-27). He was the missionary companion of Paul on the first missionary journey (cf. 1Co_9:6). See Special Topic at Gal_2:13.
▣ "taking Titus along also" Titus was one of Paul's faithful helpers (cf. 2Co_8:23). He used him in especially difficult places such as Corinth and Crete. He was a full Gentile, and not half-Gentile as Timothy. The Jerusalem church did not demand that Paul circumcise him (cf. Acts 15). Surprisingly, Titus is never mentioned by name in Acts. Sir William Ramsay and A. T. Robertson speculate that Titus was Luke's brother, explaining the absence of any specific mention of him (an act of family humility), but this is unsubstantiated. Martin Luther speculated that Paul took Titus with him to Jerusalem as a test case. Others say that he took Titus along, but only later did Paul realize the significance of the Jerusalem Church's failure to demand that Titus be circumcised because he was a pure Greek (cf. Gal_2:3).
Gal_2:2 "It was because of a revelation that I went up" If one assumes that Acts 15 is the setting, Act_15:2 produces a discrepancy. However, it has been supposed that the revelation came from one of the five prophets at Antioch who conveyed it to the church. Then the church at Antioch passed on to Paul the need for a visit to Jerusalem.
▣ "and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles" This is very significant in its relationship to Gal_2:3-5. Why did Paul lay his gospel before the Apostles? (1) Did he want them to agree with him and affirm his gospel? or (2) Was he reacting to the presence of false teachers (cf. Gal_2:4)? The latter possibility best fits the parenthetical aside of Gal_2:4-5. This reporting session seems to parallel Act_15:12.
NASB "but I did so in private to those who were of reputation"
NKJV "but privately to those who were of reputation"
NRSV "(though only in a private meeting with the acknowledged leaders)"
TEV "In a private meeting with the leaders"
NJB "and privately I laid before the leading men"
Reading Acts 15 to find a private meeting first poses a difficulty. However, Act_15:2 b and Gal_2:6 could refer to a meeting of the top leadership. Paul may have met with the leadership first for the purpose of getting a better hearing instead of meeting with the whole congregation which may have been previously infiltrated with Judaizers (those who demanded that one had to be a Jew before one could be saved).
Some scholars have suggested in recent years, probably due to the overemphasis of the Tübingen theologians from Germany, that tension existed between Paul and the Apostles in Jerusalem. Some assert that Paul's three unusual phrases referring to the Jerusalem leaders found in Gal_2:2; Gal_2:6 (twice), and 9 are somewhat disparaging. These phrases may be viewed pejoratively with three points in mind.
1. They underscore the false teachers' overemphasis of the original Twelve Apostles in their attempt to depreciate Paul, not that Paul had any personal tension with the Twelve.
2. Possibly Paul was disappointed with some of the Apostles, where they did not really grasp the worldwide mission of the Church, or in Peter's shameful withdrawal from the fellowship table with Gentiles because of the arrivals of some from Jerusalem in Gal_2:11-14.
3. These phrases may refer not to the Apostles, but to other church leaders who claimed authority or they refer to only some of the Apostles.
NASB, TEV "for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain"
NKJV "lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain"
NRSV "in order to make sure that I was not running, or had not run, in vain"
NJB "for fear the course I was adopting or had already adopted would not be allowed"
This obviously does not refer to Paul seeking theological affirmation from the Jerusalem leaders for this would go against the entire context. But here, the practicality of the mission effort among the Gentiles was at stake(cf. 2Co_7:14; 2Co_9:9) and Paul hoped and prayed for a consensus which he would subsequently receive. Paul expressed similar fears elsewhere (cf. Php_2:16; 1Th_3:5).
Gal_2:3 "But not even Titus who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised" Even with its straightforward meaning, questions arise regarding:
1. a manuscript variation in Gal_2:5 where the word "not" is omitted in the western family of manuscripts, particularly manuscript D
2. the ambiguity of Gal_2:4 which has caused some to say that Paul did circumcise Titus, not out of compulsion but to show his freedom
However, this undermines the entire structure of Paul's argument. Paul was already under attack, apparently for circumcising Timothy (cf. Act_16:3), who was half-Jewish, but he would not, for a minute, yield to the circumcision of Titus. In reality the issue was not really circumcision (cf. Rom_2:28-29 and Gal_6:15), but how a human becomes right with God. In Galatians Paul contrasted the works-oriented way of the Jews and Judaizers with the grace-oriented way of the gospel of Jesus.
Gal_2:4
NASB "But it was because of the false brethren. . .secretly brought in"
NKJV "but this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in"
NRSV "But because of false believers secretly brought in"
TEV "had pretended to be brothers and joined the group"
NJB "The question came up only because some who do not really belong to the brotherhood have furtively crept in"
These false brothers are mentioned in other places (cf. Act_15:1; Act_15:5; 2Co_11:13; 2Co_11:26 and 1Th_2:14-16). The verbal form is passive, implying that they were smuggled in by someone, possibly
1. unbelieving Jews
2. a sect of believing Jews called Judaizers
3. Satan himself
The term "false brothers" (pseudadelphous) is similar to the compound used in 2Pe_2:1 to designate "false leadership" (pseudoprophçtai and pseudodidaskaloi). The term's usage in Koine Greek commonly designated traitors within a city who allowed the enemy to sneak into the city and survey its defenses.
Another problem in interpretation concerns the locale of the treachery. Did the false brothers sneak into:
1. the Church at Jerusalem
2. the Jerusalem Council
3. the Church at Antioch
On these minutiae of interpretation, certainty is impossible and, therefore, dogmatism is unwarranted.
▣ "to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage" Paul's emphasis on freedom in Christ was paramount (cf. Act_13:39; Gal_5:1; Gal_5:13). In this context, freedom from Jewish rules and regulations is meant, a concept expanded in the following chapters. It is important to note that we are truly free in Christ, but our freedom is not intended as a license for sin (cf. Rom_14:1 to Rom_15:13 and 1 Corinthians 8-10). This dialectical tension between freedom and responsibility, inherent in the gospel, is illustrated in Paul's emphases on "responsibility" to the church at Corinth but on "freedom" to the churches of Galatia. Both are true! They must be held in balance!
Gal_2:5 "But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour" "We" must refer to Paul and Barnabas. They were agreed in their opposition to the requirement that all Gentiles be circumcised (and become responsible to the Mosaic Law) after their conversion.
"Not" is present in manuscripts P46, à , B, C, D1, F, and G (UBS4 gives its inclusion an "A" rating). It is missing only in the corrector of the sixth century manuscript D2 and the Old Latin Version. The reason that Paul emphasizes submission to each other in Eph_5:21 and yet staunchly stands against submission in this case is because he believes that these "false brothers" are not really Christians. Paul asserts his belief that those who base their right standing with God upon their own effort are not true Christians (cf. Gal_1:8-9; Gal_5:2-12; Rom_10:2-5; and 1Th_2:14-16). The crucial question, then, is "on whom did they base their trust: themselves or Christ?"
▣ "so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you" No small matter, this argument was the basis for continuing the Gentile mission. Truth is such an important NT word. See Special Topic following.
hyperlink
Gal_2:6
NASB "But from those who were of high reputation"
NKJV "But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were"
NRSV "And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders"
TEV "But those who seemed to be the leaders"
NJB "these people who are acknowledged leaders"
This phrase can either refer to: (1) some of the Twelve; or (2) certain leaders in the Jerusalem church. Paul's point was that their opposition does not affect his God-given call, assignment and gospel. However, F. F. Bruce quotes Josephus in War of the Jews, 3.453; 4.141,159 to illustrate that "seemed" is not always used derogatorily.
▣ "God shows no partiality" This OT judicial metaphor (cf. Deu_10:17; 2Ch_19:7) originally meant "to lift the face" (cf. Lev_19:15; Deu_1:17; Deu_16:19; Act_10:34). Paul was alluding to the practice of judges making decisions based on favoritism or special standing of the person accused. There is no partiality in God (cf. Rom_2:11; Eph_6:9; Col_3:25; 1Pe_1:17).
NASB, NRSV "contributed nothing to me"
NKJV "added nothing to me"
TEV "made no new suggestions to me"
NJB "had nothing to add to the Good News as I preach it"
Here is Paul's central affirmation of independence ("to me" is fronted for emphasis), both for himself and for his gospel, from the authority of the Twelve or the Mother Church in Jerusalem. This is not a debasement of the Twelve or the leaders of the Jerusalem Church but an emphasis on the divine nature of Paul's call and revelation.
Gal_2:7 "But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised" A major Pauline point, he continued to build on the context begun in Gal_1:10. When the Jerusalem leaders saw and heard Paul, they affirmed that God had called and chosen him.
▣ "I had been entrusted" is a perfect passive verbal form, emphasizing Paul's continuing role as a steward of the gospel by means of God's call and equipping through the Spirit (cf. 1Co_9:17; 1Th_2:4; 1Ti_1:11; Tit_1:3). Other passages further support Paul's call to be an Apostle to the Gentiles (cf. Act_9:15; Rom_1:5; Rom_11:13; Rom_15:16; Gal_1:16; Eph_3:8; 1Ti_2:7; 2Ti_4:17).
▣ "just as Peter" The use of the term "Peter" in Gal_2:7-8 is somewhat unusual in Galatians. In all of the other citations by Paul in Galatians where Peter is named, he is called "Cephas," Aramaic for "rock," (cf. Gal_1:18; Gal_2:9; Gal_2:11; Gal_2:14). However, "Peter" does seem to be original here, and the two names are synonymous.
Gal_2:8 Another parenthesis inside the complex grammatical structure of Gal_2:1-10, it may refer to either geography or an ethnic community (cf. Gal_2:9 d). Both Peter and Paul had divine assignments!
Gal_2:9 "and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James, Cephas, and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship" These "pillars" were the three leaders of the Christian church in Jerusalem. This title was used in connection with "the Apostles" by Clement of Rome (writing in a.d. 95) and Ignatius. It is also used positively in Rev_3:12. Possibly the phrase originated in the rabbis' use of the term to describe Abraham and Moses. Paul again supported his claim that not only was he independent, but that at least some of the Apostles (Peter and John, part of Jesus' inner circle) recognized his God-given authority and affirmed him with the right hand of fellowship. This "James" is not one of the Twelve, but Jesus' half-brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church (cf. Acts 15).
The phrase, "who were reputed to be pillars," is not a negative assessment, but probably a reference to the false teachers' accusation against Paul. In this context Paul does not want to depreciate these three leaders, but accentuate the fact that they publically acknowledged his and Barnabas' ministry!
▣ "the grace that had been given to me" the verbal is an aorist passive participle. See note at Gal_1:15 about the relationship between "grace" and "Spirit."
▣ "James" See Special Topic below.
hyperlink
▣ "fellowship" See Special Topic following.
hyperlink
▣ "so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised" This phrase refers primarily to geography, not race. There were Gentiles in Palestine and Jews outside Palestine. Many of Paul's churches were a mixture of both because when he came to a new city, he went first to the synagogue to preach.
Gal_2:10 "They only asked us to remember the poor" Paul was first introduced to the concept of a special offering for the poor in Jerusalem by the church at Antioch (cf. Act_11:27-30). He developed this into a project for Gentile churches (cf. Act_24:17; 1Co_16:1-2; 2 Corinthians 8, 9; and Rom_15:25-27). If Galatians 2 parallels Acts 15, explaining why the other fellowship stipulations of Act_15:23-29 are not mentioned becomes more difficult. Therefore many have seen this verse as an argument for making this visit contemporary with Act_11:27-30.