Galatians 2:13. And the rest of the Jewish Christians also played the hypocrite jointly with him—those, namely, living in Antioch, who previously, in harmony with the liberal standpoint which they had already attained to, had held fellowship at meals with the Gentile Christians of the place, but now, misled by the influential example of Peter, had likewise drawn back. This was hypocrisy on their part and on Peter’s, because, although at the bottom of their hearts convinced of Christian freedom, they, from fear of men (Galatians 2:12), concealed the more liberal conviction of which they were conscious, and behaved just as if they entertained the opposite view. It is true that the apostolic council had not decided anything as to the conduct of the Jewish Christians among Gentile Christians; but the immorality consisted in the inwardly untrue duplicity of their behaviour, which was more than a mere inconsistency (Baur) of reformed Judaism, conceived by Paul as being hypocrisy (Hilgenfeld). The view of Holsten, z. Ev. des Paul. u. Petr. p. 357 ff., is similar.

On συνυπεκρίθ., comp. Polyb. iii. 92. 5, v. 49. 7; Plut. Mark 14:17; Joseph. Bell. xv. 7. 5.

καὶ Βαρνάβ.] even Barnabas, who was my associate withal in the apostleship to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:9), and should consequently least of all have ventured insincerely to deny the principle of Christian freedom, to the disparagement of the Gentile Christians! So injurious was the effect of Peter’s example!

συναπήχθη] was jointly led away (led astray), namely, from his own standpoint. Comp. 2 Peter 3:17 (Romans 12:16, and Wetstein in loc.). ὥστε with a finite verb, in the secondary sentence (comp. John 3:16), denotes the consequence simply as a fact which has occurred. See Tittmann, Synon. II. p. 70; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 1012 f.; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 772. The infinitive would make the representation subjective (the seduction being conceived as a necessary result).

αὐτῶν] that is, αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν Ἰουδ. It is emphatically prefixed. The dative is instrumental: by their hypocrisy, not to their hypocrisy (Luther and others). No one can, without wronging Paul in respect to the choice of his strongly inculpating expression,[88] either call in question the fact that the conduct of Peter is here expressly designated as hypocrisy (Schwegler, I. p. 129), or reduce it to a mere supposition; although Ritschl, p. 145, is of opinion that the reproach thus used does not quite evince a clear and thorough conviction of the rightness of the non-Jewish practice. The purposely chosen expression in our passage shows, on the contrary, that Peter’s conviction, which was well known to Paul, agreed with the conviction of Paul himself, although it was hypocritically denied by the former. Peter’s ὑπόκρισις, according to the text, consisted in the Ἰουδαΐζειν, to which he had drawn back after his intercourse with the Gentile Christians, not in his previous fellowship with them, which is alleged to have been “a momentary unfaithfulness to his real conviction” (Baur, in the theol. Jahrb. 1849, p. 476; Schwegler, Zeller, Hilgenfeld). And the censure which Paul—certainly unwillingly, and with a complete realizing and appreciating of the moral situation to which it has reference—has directed against Peter expressly on the ground of hypocrisy,[89] exhibits plainly the agreement in principle of the personal convictions of the two apostles (comp. Wiesinger, de consensu, locor. Gal. ii. et Act. xv. p. 36; Lechler, p. 426).

[88] This expression is all the more strictly to be understood as it stands, since Paul has not anywhere else in his epistles or speeches used either the word ὑποκρίνεσθαι, or ὑποκριτής, or (with the exception of 1 Timothy 4:2) ὑπόκρισις. He would be the less likely to have omitted to weigh the gravity of the reproach conveyed in this very word otherwise strange to him, especially seeing that it was used after so long a time and was directed against Peter. This remark also applies in opposition to Schneckenburger in the Stud. u. Krit. 1855, p. 554 f., and to Möller on de Wette.

[89] Not merely (comp. de Wette) on account of an easily excusable want of firmness and clearness in conviction (Bisping), or of a momentary throwing of the same into the background under pressure of circumstances (Reithmayr). Even Erasmus exerts himself to come at length to the result, that “Pauli objurgatio nihil aliud fuit quam confirmatio parum adhuc sibi constantium.”

Galatians 2:13. συνυπεκρίθησαν … ὑποκρί σει The verb ὑποκρίνεσθαι is often used of playing a part as an actor in a play without any invidious meaning; but ὑπόκρισις corresponds throughout the N.T. to its English equivalent hypocrisy, and fidelity to the Greek text almost demands that rendering here. The men who had hitherto eaten with the uncircumcised and now withdrew because they shrank from giving offence were, in fact, affecting religious scruples which they did not feel, and the Apostle does not hesitate to denounce such insincerity by its true name hypocrisy.—καὶ Βαρνάβας: even Barnabas. The defection of Barnabas was a heavier blow to the cause of Gentile freedom than the vacillation of Peter. With the single exception of Paul himself, Barnabas had been the most effective minister of Christ for the conversion of Greeks; he had been of late deputed to appear with Paul as their representative in Jerusalem, and his withdrawal from social communion with Greek Christians fell upon them with the force of a betrayal. Yet Paul, who had been for many years his most intimate companion, and knew his heart, writes more in sorrow than in anger of his lamentable weakness in being led away by evil example. For he saw that he was the victim of stronger wills than his own. Jerusalem had been his early home and the place of his earliest ministry. The Twelve had been his first teachers in Christ: his cousin John Mark, who was even then in Antioch, was so dear to him that Barnabas, when driven to choose between him and Paul, chose Mark for the companion of his future ministry. What wonder then that he was tempted on this occasion for a moment to yield to the influence of Peter and the brethren from Jerusalem!

13. dissembled likewise with him] Lit. practised like hypocrisy. They believed and professed that they might eat with the Gentiles, they acted as if it were unlawful to do so.

Barnabas also] or, ‘even Barnabas’, who as Paul’s companion was familiar with his clear and unreserved teaching on the great doctrine of justification by faith—even he was swept away with the rising tide of dissimulation. This may have been the commencement of the dissension which took place so soon after between Paul and Barnabas, resulting in their separation (Acts 15:39).

Galatians 2:13. Ὁι λοιποὶ) The others, believers.—καὶ) even Barnabas, whom you would by no means think likely to do such a thing.—συναπήχθη, was led away) The power of frequent example.

Galatians 2:13Dissembled with him (συνυπεκρίθησαν)

N.T.o. Peter's course influenced the other Jewish Christians as Antioch, who had previously followed his example in eating with Gentiles.

Was carried away (συναπήχθη)

Lit. was carried away with them (συν). In Paul only here and Romans 12:16, on which see note. In lxx once, Exodus 14:6.

With their dissimulation (αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει)

Not to or over to their dissimulation. Paul uses a strong word, which is employed only in 1 Timothy 4:2. The kindred verb ὑποκρίνεσθαι to play a part, and the noun ὑποκριτής hypocrisy do not occur in his letters. Their act was hypocrisy, because it was a concealment of their own more liberal conviction, and an open profession of still adhering to the narrow Pharisaic view. It was "a practical denial of their better spiritual insight" (Wieseler).

Galatians 2:13 Interlinear
Galatians 2:13 Parallel Texts


Galatians 2:13 NIV
Galatians 2:13 NLT
Galatians 2:13 ESV
Galatians 2:13 NASB
Galatians 2:13 KJV

Galatians 2:13 Bible Apps
Galatians 2:13 Parallel
Galatians 2:13 Biblia Paralela
Galatians 2:13 Chinese Bible
Galatians 2:13 French Bible
Galatians 2:13 German Bible

Bible Hub