Galatians 2 14

Galatians 2:14 kjv

But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Galatians 2:14 nkjv

But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?

Galatians 2:14 niv

When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

Galatians 2:14 esv

But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas 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?"

Galatians 2:14 nlt

When I saw that they were not following the truth of the gospel message, I said to Peter in front of all the others, "Since you, a Jew by birth, have discarded the Jewish laws and are living like a Gentile, why are you now trying to make these Gentiles follow the Jewish traditions?

Galatians 2 verses

Galatians 2 14 Meaning

This verse captures Paul's public confrontation with Peter in Antioch due to Peter's hypocritical behavior. Peter, along with other Jewish Christians including Barnabas, had previously eaten with Gentile believers, acknowledging their equal standing in Christ. However, when certain Jewish believers from Jerusalem, associated with James, arrived, Peter withdrew from fellowship with the Gentiles and stopped eating with them. Paul perceived this as a failure to live consistently with the "truth of the gospel," which proclaims that salvation is by grace through faith alone for both Jew and Gentile, making ritual distinctions irrelevant for fellowship. Paul rebuked Peter because his actions effectively pressured Gentiles to adopt Jewish customs, undermining the foundational principle of Christian unity and freedom from the Law.

Galatians 2 14 Context

Galatians 2 continues Paul's defense of his apostleship and the gospel he preaches, which emphasizes justification by faith alone apart from the Mosaic Law. Paul recounts his journey to Jerusalem (often identified with the famine relief visit in Acts 11), where he privately met with the "pillars" (James, Cephas/Peter, and John) who affirmed his gospel to the Gentiles. This set the stage for the incident in Antioch.

The immediate context is Peter's visit to Antioch. Initially, Peter ate freely with Gentile Christians, embodying the truth that the division between Jew and Gentile had been overcome in Christ. However, the arrival of certain Jewish believers "from James" (likely traditionalists from Jerusalem who held to the importance of Mosaic customs, though not necessarily the same as the full-blown Judaizers who taught circumcision as necessary for salvation) led Peter to withdraw from table fellowship with Gentiles. His actions implied that Gentile believers were somehow lesser or impure unless they observed Jewish customs, even though he knew better. This subtle act of social pressure undermined the truth and unity of the gospel. Paul's public rebuke highlighted the severe implications of such a compromise for the very heart of the Christian faith.

Galatians 2 14 Word analysis

• "But when I saw" (ἀλλὰ ὅτε εἶδον - alla hote eidon): Indicates a direct observation and immediate understanding by Paul, highlighting his discernment of the spiritual compromise involved, not just a social gaffe.

• "that they were not walking uprightly" (ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθοποδοῦσιν - hoti ouk orthopodousin): Orthopodousin (from orthos "straight" and pous "foot") means "walking with a straight foot," hence "behaving correctly" or "living consistently." Their actions (Peter's and those who followed him like Barnabas) were crooked or inconsistent with the principles of the gospel they professed. It was a deviation from true conduct, reflecting spiritual hypocrisy rather than simple error.

• "according to the truth of the gospel" (πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου - pros ten alētheian tou euangeliou): This is the foundational standard against which Peter's actions are measured. The "truth of the gospel" is the message that salvation and inclusion in God's family are by faith in Christ, not by adherence to the Law, rendering obsolete any ceremonial distinctions between Jew and Gentile within the church. Peter's withdrawal contradicted this core truth.

• "I said to Cephas" (εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ - eipon tō Kēphā): Paul's direct address to Peter (Cephas is Aramaic for Peter) underscores the high stakes and the need for immediate, blunt correction from an apostle to an apostle.

• "before them all" (ἔμπροσθεν πάντων - emprosthen pantōn): This specifies the public nature of the rebuke. Peter's action was public, causing a ripple effect throughout the church, so the correction needed to be equally public to address the offense and its damaging influence. This was not a private dispute but a public theological and ethical correction.

• "If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew" (Εἰ σὺ Ἰουδαῖος ὑπάρχων ἐθνίζεις καὶ οὐκ Ἰουδαϊκῶς - Ei sy Ioudaios hyparchōn ethnizes kai ouk Ioudaikōs): This is Paul's rhetorical trap. Peter, a Jew by birth, had lived "like a Gentile" (ethnizes meaning "to gentile-ize" or adopt Gentile ways of living) by eating freely with them and not strictly observing Jewish dietary laws. Paul implies that Peter, when alone with Gentiles, had demonstrated that Jewish customs were not binding for table fellowship, showing flexibility. His current behavior was a regression.

• "how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?" (πῶς τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις Ἰουδαΐζειν; - pōs ta ethnē anankazeis Ioudaïzein?): The core of the accusation. Anankazeis means "to compel" or "force." Peter wasn't explicitly forcing Gentiles, but his actions of separation created a strong social pressure. By refusing to eat with them unless they conformed to Jewish practices, he was implicitly demanding that Gentiles "Judaize" (Ioudaïzein - "to live like a Jew," referring to observing Mosaic Law rituals like dietary laws or circumcision) in order to enjoy full fellowship. This challenged the gospel's sufficiency for Gentiles.

• Words-group analysis:

  • "not walking uprightly according to the truth of the gospel": This phrase captures the heart of the matter – the deviation from a core theological principle of the Christian faith. It's a failure in both practice and theological consistency. Their behavior indicated that Gentile believers, despite their faith, were considered "less than" if they did not adhere to Jewish customs.
  • "If you... live like a Gentile... how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?": This masterful rhetorical question exposes Peter's profound hypocrisy. It highlights the stark contradiction between Peter's private practice (or former practice) of freedom from the Law and his public concession to legalistic pressure, which then implicitly coerced others into legalism.

Galatians 2 14 Bonus section

The confrontation at Antioch was not just a personal disagreement but a clash over the theological foundations of early Christianity. It clarified that justification is by faith alone, applicable to both Jews and Gentiles, and that salvation does not require adherence to the Mosaic Law's ceremonial aspects. This episode solidified the early church's understanding that the division wall between Jew and Gentile, based on ritual observance, had been abolished by Christ (Eph 2:14). It also demonstrated Paul's uncompromising zeal for the gospel's purity and his courage to correct even a respected leader like Peter when the core truth was at stake. This public rebuke of Peter is significant for showing apostolic fallibility and the priority of theological truth over hierarchical status or social peace. It exemplifies that Christian unity is based on common faith in Christ, not cultural or legalistic uniformity.

Galatians 2 14 Commentary

Galatians 2:14 details a pivotal confrontation underscoring the vital distinction between legalism and the purity of the gospel of grace. Paul rebukes Peter not for a minor social faux pas, but for behavior that contradicted the very essence of justification by faith and unity in Christ. Peter, the prominent apostle, succumbed to peer pressure from those "from James," implicitly denying the spiritual equality and inclusion of Gentiles in Christ's body without requiring adherence to the Mosaic Law. His withdrawal from table fellowship effectively compelled Gentiles to adopt Jewish customs, thereby adding conditions for full acceptance that the gospel explicitly removes.

Paul's public and sharp rebuke highlights the serious ramifications of this hypocrisy: it confused new believers, gave credence to the false teaching of the Judaizers, and fundamentally undermined the cross of Christ by suggesting that salvation or fellowship depended on something more than faith. It wasn't about Peter's personal liberty, but about his actions impacting others and misrepresenting the gospel's truth. This episode serves as a powerful reminder that sound doctrine must lead to sound practice, and even apostolic figures can falter, necessitating bold, Spirit-led correction for the sake of the truth. It underscores that all believers, regardless of status, are accountable to live in accordance with the "truth of the gospel."

• Example for practical usage: A modern application might involve a Christian leader who publicly affirms that all are equal in Christ regardless of ethnicity, but then only socializes or conducts meetings with members of their own ethnic background, indirectly pressuring others to conform culturally for true inclusion. This subtly undermines the "truth of the gospel" just as Peter's actions did.