Galatians 2:11-21

[JvMill]

Hi Friends who are more knowledgeable than me,

Reading Galatians, I was struck by a difference between the ESV and the NASB95. In Galatians 2:11, Paul begins his account of rebuking Peter for his behavior in Antioch. In the ESV, Paul's quote of himself begins and ends in verse 14, but in the NASB the quote ends in verse 21, making the entire section his rebuke of Peter. What thinks you? A cursory reading (without any Greek, because I am ignorant) makes it seem the NASB95 is right, for a couple reasons:

1. Why would Paul say to the Galatian church, "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles"? It seems to make more sense being said to Peter. I could see it being addressed toward the Galatians, speaking to them about Peter and himself, but it doesn't seem that natural of a reading.

2. 3:1 could be seen as Paul bringing it back to his dialogue toward the Galatians, since he readdresses them.

Please let me know what you think. Those are my initial thoughts.

John

 

[Contra_Mundum]

It doesn't impact the argument *in this epistle* where the quote ends. As for that, it's a judgment call by a reader or a translator.

For what it's worth, an extended quote seems superfluous, as Paul is recalling that past event and doubtless doing some summary in the process.

 

[MW]

Please let me know what you think.

Good points. The extended quotation seems to me to be the more natural reading of it, and that is how I have taken it in sermons on this passage.

I think the only plausible argument against it is the so-called impropriety of Paul addressing Peter in terms of the doctrine of justification by faith, as if he did not know it. But when we consider Paul is bringing out the practical implications of the doctrine for Gentile inclusion that argument fades into insignificance.

An apostle faltering on the consistent application of the doctrine of justification is a sobering reminder to us all that good doctrines do not in and of themselves make good Christians.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Well, I am certainly not more knowledgeable than you, but I will offer my two cents nonetheless.

I believe that the ESV is 100% correct in this instance. I do not believe verses 15-21 should be a quotation of Paul to Peter. It would almost strike me as presumptuous for Paul to feel it necessary to expound so deeply on such matters with a fellow Apostle of Christ. I think in verse 14 we have the simple and straightforward rebuke, and the following verses is Paul's explanation to the Galatian church.

 

[Pomopu]

Well, I am certainly not more knowledgeable than you, but I will offer my two cents nonetheless.

I believe that the ESV is 100% correct in this instance. I do not believe verses 15-21 should be a quotation of Paul to Peter. It would almost strike me as presumptuous for Paul to feel it necessary to expound so deeply on such matters with a fellow Apostle of Christ. I think in verse 14 we have the simple and straightforward rebuke, and the following verses is Paul's explanation to the Galatian church.

I second this idea. The main thrust of Paul's response, content wise, is the rhetorical question. It seems unwieldy, unlikely, un-Pauline, for the rest of the verses to have been meant to also be understood as the direct verbal response to Peter. If it were to be an extended quotation, it borders on being a rant, in my reading of the verses. And besides, the exclamation "O foolish Galatians" is more seamless in a literary sense if he had stopped directly addressing Peter some verses before that exclamation. You would expect a buffer between addressing Peter and his exclamation to the Galatians, I mean to say.

 

[cthorn14]

Please let me know what you think.

I agree, and have always read it as an extended quote.

My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Well, I am certainly not more knowledgeable than you, but I will offer my two cents nonetheless.

I believe that the ESV is 100% correct in this instance. I do not believe verses 15-21 should be a quotation of Paul to Peter. It would almost strike me as presumptuous for Paul to feel it necessary to expound so deeply on such matters with a fellow Apostle of Christ. I think in verse 14 we have the simple and straightforward rebuke, and the following verses is Paul's explanation to the Galatian church.

How is it any way presumptuous, if Paul is 1) a peer of Peter, and 2) if like a David he leapt to the defense of his imperiled flock? Peter was dangerously misleading at the point of his hypocrisy. The rebuke, and theological lesson was apt, not just for Peter but for the onlookers as well.

Or, perhaps the rest of that disputed portion was delivered in a sermon soon after, Peter present or no. Quote, summary, or simply part of the letter, it stands as a refutation of Peter's error. But the salutary part is that in Act.15 it seems clear Peter received his lesson with grace, and was better for the experience.

 

[Alive in Christ]

How is it any way presumptuous, if Paul is 1) a peer of Peter, and 2) if like a David he leapt to the defense of his imperiled flock? Peter was dangerously misleading at the point of his hypocrisy. The rebuke, and theological lesson was apt, not just for Peter but for the onlookers as well.

Or, perhaps the rest of that disputed portion was delivered in a sermon soon after, Peter present or no. Quote, summary, or simply part of the letter, it stands as a refutation of Peter's error. But the salutary part is that in Act.15 it seems clear Peter received his lesson with grace, and was better for the experience.

Paul was correct in his rebuke of Peter, and verse 14 hits the nail on the head, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”. That sums it up perfectly.

I don't think Paul would feel the need to say to Peter, "But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not!", or, "And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.". In my own opinion, I just can't imagine that Paul would presume to preach at Peter, a fellow Apostle and Jew, in such a rudimentary fashion.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Paul was correct in his rebuke of Peter, and verse 14 hits the nail on the head, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”. That sums it up perfectly.

I don't think Paul would feel the need to say to Peter, "But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not!", or, "And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.". In my own opinion, I just can't imagine that Paul would presume to preach at Peter, a fellow Apostle and Jew, in such a rudimentary fashion.

I love to tell the story
For those who know it best
Seem hungering and thirsting
To hear it like the rest...

Sometimes we don't know our own privation, until reminded for our good.

Still, you're free to hold your own opinion on the passage.

 

[MW]

In my own opinion, I just can't imagine that Paul would presume to preach at Peter, a fellow Apostle and Jew, in such a rudimentary fashion.

Obviously Paul did "preach at Peter," telling him that it was hypocrisy for one who had come to live as a Gentile to require Gentiles to live as Jews. It would be a mistake to interpret this passage as if it were setting forth rudimentary doctrine. He is showing the implications of the doctrine for the way believing Jews should consider Gentiles -- a point that speaks to the inconsistency of Peter, not to the foolish error of the Galatians, who once did service to heathen gods.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Obviously Paul did "preach at Peter," telling him that it was hypocrisy for one who had come to live as a Gentile to require Gentiles to live as Jews. It would be a mistake to interpret this passage as if it were setting forth rudimentary doctrine. He is showing the implications of the doctrine for the way believing Jews should consider Gentiles -- a point that speaks to the inconsistency of Peter, not to the foolish error of the Galatians, who once did service to heathen gods.

My issue wasn't him preaching at Peter, but the manner of preaching following verse 14. Yes, he did preach at Peter, and I believe that his preaching at Peter ended in verse 14, as I just cannot imagine Paul would feel the need to explain to Peter, who was an Apostle of God and a fellow Jew, that falling short in one's endeavor to seek justification doesn't make Christ a servant of sin. Or how he lives his life by faith in the Son of God who loved him and gave himself up for him. It just seems way more appropriate if the audience was the church in Galatia rather than one of the Twelve.

I guess there's no way to know for sure, though.

 

[Cornelius Van Halen]

as I just cannot imagine Paul would feel the need to explain to Peter, who was an Apostle of God and a fellow Jew, that falling short in one's endeavor to seek justification doesn't make Christ a servant of sin. Or how he lives his life by faith in the Son of God who loved him and gave himself up for him.

I think the point @Contra_Mundum was making is that Peter was not alone in his sin. It wasn't just Peter that needed to be rebuked, it was everyone else as well. Telling Peter has a ricochet effect - what he tells him, he tells the others who have observed (or participated) in Peter's hypocrisy.