Galatians:2:1-10
rwp@Galatians:2:1 @{Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again} (\epeita dia dekatessarn etn palin anebn\) This use of \dia\ for interval between is common enough. Paul is not giving a recital of his visits to Jerusalem, but of his points of contact with the apostles in Jerusalem. As already observed, he here refers to the Jerusalem Conference given by Luke in strkjv@Acts:15| when Paul and Barnabas were endorsed by the apostles and elders and the church over the protest of the Judaizers who had attacked them in Antioch (Acts:15:1f.|). But Paul passes by another visit to Jerusalem, that in strkjv@Acts:11:30| when Barnabas and Saul brought alms from Antioch to Jerusalem and delivered them to "the elders" with no mention of the apostles who were probably out of the city since the events in strkjv@Acts:12| apparently preceded that visit and Peter had left for another place (Acts:12:17|). Paul here gives the inside view of this private conference in Jerusalem that came in between the two public meetings (Acts:15:4,6-29|). {With Barnabas} (\meta Barnab\). As in strkjv@Acts:15:2|. {Taking Titus also with me} (\sunparalabn kai Titon\). Second aorist active participle of \sunparalamban\ the very verb used in strkjv@Acts:15:37f.| of the disagreement between Paul and Barnabas about Mark. Titus is not mentioned in Acts 15 nor anywhere else in Acts for some reason, possibly because he was Luke's own brother. But his very presence was a challenge to the Judaizers, since he was a Greek Christian.
rwp@Galatians:2:2 @{By revelation} (\kata apokalupsin\). In strkjv@Acts:15:2| the church sent them. But surely there is no inconsistency here. {I laid before them} (\anethemn autois\). Second aorist middle indicative of old word \anatithmi\, to put up, to place before, with the dative case. But who were the "them" (\autois\)? Evidently not the private conference for he distinguishes this address from that, "but privately" (\kat' idian\). Just place strkjv@Acts:15:4f.| beside the first clause and it is clear: "I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles," precisely as Luke has recorded. Then came the private conference after the uproar caused by the Judaizers (Acts:15:5|). {Before them who were of repute} (\tois dokousin\). He names three of them (Cephas, James, and John). James the Lord's brother, for the other James is now dead (Acts:12:1f.|). But there were others also, a select group of real leaders. The decision reached by this group would shape the decision of the public conference in the adjourned meeting. Songs:far as we know Paul had not met John before, though he had met Peter and James at the other visit. Lightfoot has much to say about the Big Four (St. Paul and the Three) who here discuss the problems of mission work among Jews and Gentiles. It was of the utmost importance that they should see eye to eye. The Judaizers were assuming that the twelve apostles and James the Lord's brother would side with them against Paul and Barnabas. Peter had already been before the Jerusalem Church for his work in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). James was considered a very loyal Jew. {Lest by any means I should be running or had run in vain} (\m ps eis kenon trech edramon\). Negative purpose with the present subjunctive (\trech\) and then by a sudden change the aorist indicative (\edramon\), as a sort of afterthought or retrospect (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 201; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). There are plenty of classical parallels. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:5| for both together again.
rwp@Galatians:2:3 @{Being a Greek} (\Helln n\). Concessive participle, though he was a Greek. {Was compelled to be circumcised} (\nagkasth peritmthnai\). First aorist passive indicative of \anagkaz\ and first aorist passive infinitive of \peritemn\. Curiously enough some scholars interpret this language to mean that Paul voluntarily had Titus circumcised, instead of being compelled to do it, an impossible view in my opinion in the light of verse 5| and wholly inconsistent with the whole context. Paul means that he stood his ground against compulsion and all force.
rwp@Galatians:2:4 @{But because of the false brethren privately brought in} (\dia de tous pareisaktous pseudadelphous\). Late verbal adjective \pareisaktos\ from the double compound verb \pareisag\, found in papyri in the sense of brought in by the side or on the sly as here. Evidently some of the Judaizers or sympathizers whom Paul had not invited had come in as often happens. Paul terms them "false brethren" like "the false apostles" in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13| of the Judaizers in Corinth. {Who came in privily} (\hoitines pareislthon\). Repetition of the charge of their slipping in unwanted (\pareiserchomai\, late double compound, in Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:5:20|). {To spy out} (\kataskopsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \kataskope\, old Greek verb from \kataskopos\, a spy, to reconnoitre, to make a treacherous investigation. {That they might bring us into bondage} (\hina hmas katadoulsousin\). Future active indicative of this old compound, to enslave completely (\kata-\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20|. Nowhere else in N.T. This was their purpose (\hina\ and future active indicative of this causative verb). It was as serious a conflict as this. Spiritual liberty or spiritual bondage, which?
rwp@Galatians:2:5 @{No, not for an hour} (\oude pros hran\). Pointed denial that he and Barnabas yielded at all "in the way of subjection" (\ti hupotagi\, in the subjection demanded of them). The compromisers pleaded for the circumcision of Titus "because of the false brethren" in order to have peace. The old verb \eik\, to yield, occurs here alone in the N.T. See strkjv@2Corinthians:9:13| for \hupotag\. {The truth of the gospel} (\h altheia tou euaggeliou\). It was a grave crisis to call for such language. The whole problem of Gentile Christianity was involved in the case of Titus, whether Christianity was to be merely a modified brand of legalistic Judaism or a spiritual religion, the true Judaism (the children of Abraham by faith). The case of Timothy later was utterly different, for he had a Jewish mother and a Greek father. Titus was pure Greek.
rwp@Galatians:2:6 @{Somewhat} (\ti\). Something, not somebody. Paul refers to the Big Three (Cephas, James, and John). He seems a bit embarrassed in the reference. He means no disrespect, but he asserts his independence sharply in a tangled sentence with two parentheses (dashes in Westcott and Hort). {Whatsoever they were} (\hopoioi pote san\). Literally, "What sort they once were." {Hopoioi} is a qualitative word (1Thessalonians:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@James:1:24|). Lightfoot thinks that these three leaders were the ones who suggested the compromise about Titus. That is a possible, but not the natural, interpretation of this involved sentence. The use of \de\ (but) in verse 6| seems to make a contrast between the three leaders and the pleaders for compromise in verses 4f|. {They, I say, imparted nothing to me} (\emoi gar ouden prosanethento\). He starts over again after the two parentheses and drops the construction \apo tn dokountn\ and changes the construction (anacoluthon) to \hoi dokountes\ (nominative case), the men of reputation and influences whom he names in verses 8f|. See the same verb in strkjv@1:16|. They added nothing in the conference to me. The compromisers tried to win them, but they finally came over to my view. Paul won his point, when he persuaded Peter, James, and John to agree with him and Barnabas in their contention for freedom for the Gentile Christians from the bondage of the Mosaic ceremonial law.
rwp@Galatians:2:7 @{But contrariwise} (\alla tounantion\). But on the contrary (accusative of general reference, \to enantion\). Songs:far from the three championing the cause of the Judaizers as some hoped or even the position of the compromisers in verses 4f.|, they came boldly to Paul's side after hearing the case argued in the private conference. This is the obvious interpretation rather than the view that Peter, James, and John first proposed the circumcision of Titus and afterwards surrendered to Paul's bold stand. {When they saw} (\idontes\). After seeing, after they heard our side of the matter. {That I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision} (\hoti pepisteumai to euaggelion ts akrobustias\). Perfect passive indicative of \pisteu\, to intrust, which retains the accusative of the thing (\to euaggelion\) in the passive voice. This clear-cut agreement between the leaders "denotes a distinction of sphere, and not a difference of type" (Lightfoot). Both divisions in the work preach the same "gospel" (not like strkjv@1:6f.|, the Judaizers). It seems hardly fair to the Three to suggest that they at first championed the cause of the Judaizers in the face of Paul's strong language in verse 5|.
rwp@Galatians:2:8 @{He that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision} (\ho gar energsas Petri eis apostoln ts peritoms\). Paul here definitely recognizes Peter's leadership (apostleship, \apostoln\, late word, already in strkjv@Acts:1:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:2|) to the Jews and asserts that Peter acknowledges his apostleship to the Gentiles. This is a complete answer to the Judaizers who denied the genuineness of Paul's apostleship because he was not one of the twelve.
rwp@Galatians:2:9 @{They who were reputed to be pillars} (\hoi dokountes stuloi einai\). They had that reputation (\dokountes\) and Paul accepts them as such. \Stuloi\, old word for pillars, columns, as of fire (Revelation:10:1|). Songs:of the church (1Timothy:3:15|). These were the Pillar Apostles. {Gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship} (\dexias edkan emoi kai Barnabi koinnias\). Dramatic and concluding act of the pact for cooperation and coordinate, independent spheres of activity. The compromisers and the Judaizers were brushed to one side when these five men shook hands as equals in the work of Christ's Kingdom.
rwp@Galatians:2:10 @{Only} (\monon\). One item was emphasized. {We should remember} (\mnmoneumen\). Present active subjunctive, "that we should keep on remembering." {Which very thing} (\ho--auto touto\). Repetition of relative and demonstrative, tautology, "which this very thing." In fact Barnabas and Saul had done it before (Acts:11:30|). It was complete victory for Paul and Barnabas. Paul passes by the second public meeting and the letters to Antioch (Acts:15:6-29|) and passes on to Peter's conduct in Antioch.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}