Chapter II.
(Vers. 1, 2.)
(Vers. 1, 2.) Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. I went up according to a revelation and presented to them the Gospel that I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who seemed influential, so that I might not be running or had run in vain. But not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. This matter arose because of false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us. But we did not yield in submission to them, not even for an hour, so that the truth of the Gospel might remain with you. For it was on this occasion that the Galatians were subverted by the Jews, who said that Peter was teaching something different from Paul; hence, he was advised by the revelation of the Lord to go up to Jerusalem with the witnesses of his preaching, that is, Barnabas and Titus, one being a Jew and the other a Gentile; so that if anyone had stumbled because of him, their testimony would remove the obstacle, and he would explain to them the meaning of his preaching. But he conferred privately with the apostles, so that they would know that he did not disagree with the gospel rule, that is, so they wouldn't think that he was running or had run in vain, as some of the Jews who believed thought. For he could not learn anything from them, for he had been instructed by God; but by the will of God it was done for the sake of harmony and peace, that any hesitation or suspicion among his brothers and fellow apostles might be removed, and that it might benefit the Gentiles, who would see that his Gospel agreed with that of the apostles. Furthermore, they had given the law that those from the Gentiles who believed should not be troubled, but that they should only observe certain things, namely, abstaining from blood, fornication, and idolatry (Acts 21:25). Now let the Greek sophists, who claim expertise for themselves, say whether their subtle intellect naturally excels, which things have been handed down for the nations to observe. Did they not know, or did they know? But how can someone learn those things which they already know? Therefore, these things have been shown to be forbidden for the nations, who thought they were allowed: and thus they were not prohibited from homicide, since they were commanded to observe from blood. But they received this, which Noah had learned from God, to observe themselves from blood when eating meat (Gen. IX, 4). For how was it possible that the Romans, who have such authority in obeying commands, would not know that homicide should not be committed; especially since the Roman laws punish adulterers and murderers, false witnesses, thieves, evildoers, and the perpetrators of other evils? In conclusion, three of these commands are found to have been given by the apostles and elders, which the Roman laws are ignorant of, namely, to abstain from idolatry, bloodshed like Noah, and fornication. Those Greek sophists, not understanding, yet knowing that one must abstain from blood, adulterated the Scripture by adding a fourth commandment to be observed from strangulation, which, I believe, they will now understand by the will of God, because it was already said that they added it.
(Vers. 3.)
(Verse 3.) But neither Titus, who was with me, (that is, at that very time when I was in Jerusalem, Titus, who was with me) was compelled to be circumcised. Even though we were among the apostles and those who believed from the Jews, no one forced him to be circumcised. And it is understood, why should you be circumcised, when Titus, who seemed to be something, was not compelled to be circumcised, but was accepted as uncircumcised.
(Vers. 4, 5.)
(Vers. 4, 5.) However, because of the false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. And even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. This matter arose because of the false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery. To them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. (Acts 16:3). The Greeks, on the other hand, say: 'We did not give in until the appointed hour,' and they say that this agrees with their reasons; because, they say, the one who was preventing it from happening did not need to say that he had done it, in order to prove that it needed to be done. But the divine apostle, knowing that this could be objected, presents it himself in order to anticipate the slanderers, and he gives the reasons why he was compelled to do what he did not want to do. However, he says, because of the false brothers who have been brought in. He says 'brought in' because they entered with deceit, pretending to be brothers when they were enemies. Those who infiltrated, that is, those who entered with humility pretending friendship. To explore our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to subject us to bondage. To explore is to enter in such a way as to pretend one thing and seek another. In order to accuse our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus. This is the freedom in Christ Jesus, not subjecting ourselves to the Law. To subject us to bondage: that is, they entered with deceit and deception in order to subject our freedom to slavery, forcing us to subject ourselves to the law of circumcision. We yielded to subjection for an hour; that is, for an hour we subjected ourselves to servitude, humbling ourselves to the Law, so that with Timothy circumcised, deceit and scandal among the Jews would cease. For they were prepared, as it is given to understand, to incite that commotion and sedition. For there was a reason how they had access to make false accusations; for Timothy indeed had a Jewish mother, but a Greek father: and so it happened that according to the Law the circumcised child would not be. However, the Apostle wanted to take him so that he could ordain him as a bishop, as he did (for everyone in that place spoke well of him), but he suffered the plots of the Jews. For they were investigating whether he would accept an uncircumcised son of Judea, intending to cause unrest because if he disagreed with the Greeks being circumcised, as the letter from the apostles had stated, or if he did not forbid the circumcision of the sons of Israel, because the apostles had not indicated anything about this in the same letter, the believing Jews were more enraged by his authority, as the letter itself did not prohibit Jewish parents from circumcising their children. Then, he said (Acts 16:3), taking him, he circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places. But they did not have a scandal among the Gentiles, for which reason Titus was not compelled to be circumcised. Therefore, he yielded for a time, so that the truth of the Gospel may remain among the Gentiles, since they do not subject themselves to circumcision. But there was no truth of the Gospel among the Jews, because those who believed circumcised their sons; for in Christ Jesus neither foreskin nor circumcision has any value, but faith working through love (Galatians 6:15). For not only history, but also literature indicate this, that he yielded. For above, it says that Titus, being Greek, was not compelled to be circumcised: and it adds, saying: But because of the false brethren secretly brought in. What does it now signify, if not that he yielded temporarily because of the false brethren secretly brought in? If not, how would the words or the meaning follow? Certainly, it denies that Titus was compelled to be circumcised: but because of the false brethren secretly brought in, what does it signify, if not that he yielded? But if he did not yield because of the false brothers who were infiltrated, he did not yield by his own will; for he indicated that he would yield if this is it: but he did not yield because of the false brothers who were infiltrated. Therefore, if there was no need to yield, why are they called false brothers, by whose help he did not do what he should not have done? So if this is it, they showed a favor to the Apostle; because it was for their sake that he did not yield, which he should have done. Therefore, why were they called explorers, if they did not want him to do what he was going to do: but he did not do it because of them? But if he was not going to do it, undoubtedly he did it because of them: for there is no other explanation. The letters indicate this, because he yielded, and history proclaims the fact. For how could he deny that he yielded for a moment, when it is proven that he circumcised Timothy because of the Jews, which is to yield for a moment, and entered the temple purified according to the Law (Acts 21)? For he could only say that he did not yield for a moment if he was never found to have yielded. For either he would have ceased, because of false brothers, or he would not have ceased because of false brothers. Therefore, take one of the two. False brothers are those who were believers of Judaism.
(Vers. 6.)
(Verse 6.) But of those who are considered to be something, whatever they were in the past does not concern me; God does not show favoritism towards anyone. This means that the apostles, who were once ordinary and ignorant men without any status in the Law, were not hindered by this. For who can accuse someone whom God excuses? It is not a matter of who they were, but of what they are. The past does not condemn or vindicate. However, it is understood that the apostle was also knowledgeable in the Law and had a notable life, and because of this, he became the chief minister through the dispensation of the Gospel. For those who are considered something have contributed nothing to me. He says he has not received anything from the apostles, but from God, because the one who gives understanding to the unlearned in Christian doctrine, he himself also deemed it worthy to impart understanding of this kind to me when I was skilled in the law. Therefore, how could it happen that he learned from them, whom he found to be skilled, and by the grace of Christ made him even more skilled.
(Vers. 7, 8.)
(Vers. 7, 8.) But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed to me as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. For both are found to have accomplished both: but nevertheless, full authority is distinguished to Peter in the preaching of Judaism, and the perfect authority of Paul is found in the preaching to the Gentiles. Hence, he also calls himself the teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth (2 Timothy 1:11); for each one has received a distribution according to his abilities. For it was more difficult to draw and persuade those who were far from God to their faith, than those who were close.
(Vers. 9, 10.)
(Verses 9, 10.) And knowing the grace of God which was given to me, Peter and James and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised; only that we should be mindful of the poor, which very thing I also was zealous to do. From the apostles, who were reputed to be something (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man’s person), they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me, but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision (for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles); and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision; only they would that we should remember the poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do (Galatians 2:9-10). And just as he gave companions to Peter, outstanding men among the apostles, so he joined Barnabas to himself, who was attached to him by divine judgment; however, he claims the grace of primacy granted to him alone by God, just as it was granted to Peter alone among the apostles (Acts 13:2): so that the apostles of circumcision may extend their right hands to the apostles of the Gentiles to demonstrate the harmony of the society; so that both, knowing that they have attained the spirit of perfection in the dispensation of the Gospel from the Lord, may show that they read nothing mutually against each other. They agreed only on this: that they were not instructed by the command or gift of the Lord, because it was easy to know this from the Law, so they were commanded to remember the poor to whom they preached, so that they would show mercy, as they were greatly redeemed by God. Therefore, these things that happened between them and the apostles make it clear that the Galatians know that what they received from them is true and approved.
(Vers. 11.)
(Verse 11) But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” And for what reason did he add, saying: Because he was reproached? Surely he was reproachable by the truth of the Gospel, to which this act was opposed. For who among them would dare to resist Peter, the first apostle, to whom the Lord gave the keys of the kingdom of heaven, unless it was another such person, who, knowing the confidence of his own election, steadfastly disapproved of what he had done without consultation.
(Vers. 12, 13.)
(Verses 12, 13.) For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. All of them, including Barnabas, were acting in good faith, but because of the fear of those who came from James, they separated themselves from the Gentiles. It is contrary to the discipline of faith to associate with the Gentiles in the presence of those whocame from James, who were zealots for the Law and believed in observing both the Law and Christ with equal right. For they feared the boldness of those who challenged the Law. And if that were the only thing, it would not be reprehensible; but where the mistake was made, it was revealed in the things that were subjected to it. For even he himself yielded to the courage and boldness of the Jews, fearing that by this easily obtained scandal might arise, which would not be easily settled; because he purified himself according to the Law (Acts 21:26), and circumcised Timothy against his will (Acts 16:3).
(Vers. 14.)
(Verse 14.) But when I saw that they were not walking uprightly towards the truth of the Gospel, I said to Peter in front of everyone. He is specifically criticizing Peter, so that the others may learn from the one who is first. If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile, how can you force the Gentiles to Judaize? Now he reveals the reason for the criticism; there would have been no error if he had concealed it from the Gentiles in the presence of the Jews, fearing scandal: but here is the whole reason for the criticism; because when the Jews came from James, he not only separated himself from them, with whom he had lived like a Gentile, but also compelled them to Judaize, for fear that the Gentiles would not know what was true of these matters. For they knew that he had not lived as a Jew; but after hearing from him that it was necessary to follow the example of the Jews, they hesitated on what was true. For if it was true that they should Judaize, they held him as a transgressor because he had lived as a Gentile; but if it was better and true that they should live simply, the overthrow of the Gentiles was due to their weakness, by which, deprived of the good, their work was laborious and ineffective. But the Apostle Paul, when he yielded for a moment, did not approve of this; instead, he exclaimed that it was a futile and empty matter due to the fury of the Jews. Indeed, he would not have given in to this matter unless there had been a reason, by which many of the Jews boasted of their audacity. Now, Timothy was the son of a Jewish woman and a Greek father (Acts 16:1); therefore, it happened that the child was not circumcised in accordance with the Law. Therefore, they were lying in wait, investigating whether he, being born a Jew, had taken on the uncircumcised condition, which they considered unlawful for the Jewish people. They were seeking an opportunity to hold him as a violator of the Law, and for this reason, he yielded for a moment to their fury.
(Vers. 15, 16.)
(v. 15, 16.) We, by nature, are Jews and not sinners from among the Gentiles. However, knowing that a person is not justified by the works of the Law, but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law. By demonstrating that they have been deceived by clear reason, he shows them the need to keep the Law, in which no one is justified before God. For even though they themselves are Jews by nature and desire to be justified, they abandon the Law and turn to faith in Christ. For by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. He does not say that any justified person is justified by the works of the Law; for whoever are just, they are justified by faith, just as Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and the other saints.
(Vers. 17.)
(Verse 17) But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? Certainly not! For how can Christ be a minister of sin, who gives sins? Therefore, may it never be! But if we, seeking to be justified in Christ, are found to be sinners, then we acknowledge ourselves to be under sin; for faith extracts a man from the Law, that he may be justified. Therefore, if we submit to the Law, we are found to be sinners; for those who are under the Law are under a curse.
(Vers. 18.)
(Verse 18.) For if what I have destroyed, I build up again, I prove myself to be a transgressor. It is evident that by approaching Christ, the Law is left behind; for the slave becomes free. But if he returns to the Law, he becomes his own accuser: for he condemns his own action.
(Vers. 19.)
(Verse 19) For I, through the Law, died to the Law so that I may live for God. This means that through the law of faith, I died to the law of Moses. For the one who is freed from the law is the one who dies to it, and they live for God, being a servant bought by Christ. I have been crucified with Christ. It is through this crucifixion that I am united with Christ. I am not captivated by any worldly desire, but I live for God, appearing dead to the world. For the one who does not engage in the things of the world or in deceit is dead to the world.
(Vers. 20.)
(Verse 20) But now I live, not I, but Christ lives in me. It is not doubtful that in him who is liberated from death by faith, Christ lives. For while he gives sins to the worthy one by death, he himself lives in him; for by his protection he is rescued from death. But now I live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I am not ungrateful to the grace of God. Since eternal life is promised to Christians, therefore, he who now lives fortified by the helping of God, lives in the faith of the promised life. For here he contemplates an image of future life, which has been sought for us through the love of Christ at the will of God, as if a pledge. Therefore, he is not ungrateful to Christ, who perseveres in his faith, knowing that he has no benefit from anyone except from Him, and to act as an insult to Him if he were to prefer someone else whose help he could not have.
(Vers. 21.)
(Verse 21.) For if righteousness were through the Law, then Christ died in vain. Nothing could be clearer; for if a man could be justified through the Law, then Christ would not have needed to die. But because the Law could not give forgiveness of sins, nor could it triumph over death and release the captives held by the cause of sin, therefore Christ died in order to accomplish what the Law could not. And thus he did not die in vain; for his death is the justification of sinners.