GALATIANS 2:11-21

The usual placement of the events described here is somewhere between Acts 14 and 15, and related in the first part of Acts 15. In any case, it must have transpired early in Paul's career as missionary since Barnabas was only connected with Paul's first missionary journey.

Verse 11 Peter had already been given directions from God respecting the full acceptance of Gentiles, and so he was being inconsistent and knew it (see Acts 10-11). The Greek word for “condemn” only appears in the NT here and in I John 3:20. There are three possible meanings: accuse, declare guilty, or pronounce sentence against. In this case, the second definition probably fits best.

Verse 12 A number of reliable Greek manuscripts read “man” in place of “men.” However, Metzger feels that the sense demands the plural reading.

Blue: “By implication, these men came from the church in Jerusalem, perhaps as an official delegation.” James should not be blamed for the actions of these men since “it is probable that they had exceeded the terms of their commission.” Davids feels that (a) the delegation was indeed sent by James but for a different reason, and (b) their objections may have been focused on a concern for how Paul's actions might affect future outreach to the Jews.

“Those of the circumcision” may refer to those sent from James, the Judaizers or Jews in general. (Campbell)

Verse 13 “even Barnabas” Paul takes this as an amazing fact, considering the known conciliatory personality of Barnabas.

Verse 14 “not consistent, or straightforward” = not correct, with no suggestion of a moral misdeed. (Mikalowski) This word appears only here in the NT. Kilpatrick suggests that the phrase means “not on the right road to the truth of the gospel.” The truth of the Gospel here means the common fellowship of all who have accepted God's grace, not all who obey the OT regulations.

Note that even Peter the apostle must adhere to the truth of the Gospel as the norm. Some later Christian writers such as Clement of Alexandria could not accept the fact that Peter might have been doing wrong. To get around this, they proposed that Cephas and Simon Peter were in fact two different people. (J. R. Michaels)

Verses 15-21 This is a heavily theological section felled with key concepts and words such as law (6x), faith (3x), works (3x), justify / justification (5x) and Christ (8x).

Verse 15 This is a somewhat sarcastic comment aimed at the Jews who felt they were superior to Gentiles merely by the fact of their birth. Alternatively, it is possible to argue, with Barth and Blanke, that “sinners in this sentence applies to both Jews and Gentiles.

Verse 16 This is an allusion to Psalm 143:2 with Paul's addition “through deeds of the law.” He says the same thing in Romans 3:20. “He means thereby that no one will attain the status of uprightness before God's tribunal by performing deeds mandated by the Mosaic law, or by 'all that the law says.'” (Fitzmyer) By contrast, Dunn feels that this three-fold mention of “works of the law” does not refer to the Mosaic law as a whole but only those sociological issues that would separate the Jews from Gentiles (i.e. circumcision, ritual purity, food restrictions and observance of the Sabbath). Schreiner takes a third approach by concentrating on the fact that no one can fully live up to the demands of the law.

Another controversial issue concerns the proper translation of another phrase in this verse: Is it “faith in Christ” or “faith(fulness) of Christ.” The Greek preposition can be taken either way. The traditional view is to go with the first possibility, and Murray has heavily critiqued and rejected the second translation in his commentary on Romans, pp. 363-374. But, for those who might be inclined to accept “faith(fulness) of Christ” instead, that would, according to Ciampa, certainly include his death on the cross, “the act of obedience which is the ground of the justification available to those who believe in him.”

Verses 17-21 Justification, “though a legal term...expresses a moral and spiritual reality.” (Mikolaski) He also notes that this remaining argument is quite similar to the one Paul uses in Romans 3:21-31.

Verse 17 The expression “Certainly not, or God forbid” is a favorite one of Paul. It appears ten times in Romans, once in I Corinthians, and twice more in Galatians (at 3:21 and 6:14). All three of these last usages are symmetrically disposed within the overall structure of Galatians (see Galatians: Introduction to the Literary Structure).

Verse 19 Stott: “That Jesus Christ was crucified under Pontius Pilate is an established historical fact; but what could Paul possibly mean by writing that he had been crucified with Christ? As a physical fact it was manifestly not true, and as a spiritual fact it was hard to understand.” Paul explains this in Romans 6 and in the larger context of Galatians 2:15-21.

Verse 20 “Son of God” points to Jesus' divinity. In that context, see especially Philippians 2:6.

Christ giving himself for us may be an echo of Isaiah 53:12 where the Servant pours out his life. “On the human level, Judas gave him up to the priests, who gave him up to Pilate, who gave him up to the soldiers, who crucified him. But on the divine level, the Father gave him up, and he gave himself up, to die for us.” (Stott)

Luther's commentary on this verse was instrumental in Charles Wesley's conversion.