Galatians 2 18

Galatians 2:18 kjv

For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.

Galatians 2:18 nkjv

For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.

Galatians 2:18 niv

If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

Galatians 2:18 esv

For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor.

Galatians 2:18 nlt

Rather, I am a sinner if I rebuild the old system of law I already tore down.

Galatians 2 verses

Galatians 2 18 Meaning

Galatians 2:18 explains the logical and spiritual inconsistency of reverting to the Law for justification after having embraced faith in Christ. If Paul, or anyone, were to "rebuild" (re-establish as the means of righteousness) the Law, which he previously "tore down" (abandoned as the means of righteousness) by placing his faith in Christ, he would by that very act prove himself to have been a "transgressor." This means such an act would implicitly admit that abandoning the Law was a sin, thus nullifying Christ's saving work and rendering His death meaningless as a path to righteousness. The verse underscores that grace and law as methods for justification are mutually exclusive and opposing.

Galatians 2 18 Context

Galatians 2:18 is embedded within Paul's fervent defense of the gospel of grace against the Judaizers, who insisted that Gentile converts needed to observe the Mosaic Law, particularly circumcision, to be truly saved and fully accepted by God. The broader context of Galatians 2 begins with Paul's account of his visit to Jerusalem and his defense of Gentile freedom from the Law before the apostles. It culminates in his direct confrontation with Peter in Antioch, where Peter, initially eating with Gentiles, withdrew when men from James arrived, fearing the circumcised party (Gal 2:11-13). Peter's actions implied that Gentile believers were ritually unclean or inferior, thereby denying the truth of the gospel—justification by faith alone in Christ—and reinforcing a return to legalism. Verses 15-21 record Paul's public rebuke of Peter, where he lays out the foundational truth that no one is justified by works of the Law, but by faith in Christ (Gal 2:16). Verse 18 is a pivotal rhetorical question and statement within this rebuke, showing the absurdity of trying to combine or return to the Law as a path to righteousness after Christ. If going back to the Law is necessary, then moving away from the Law to Christ was a sin, thus proving himself—and by extension, Christ—to be wrong or a "transgressor."

Galatians 2 18 Word analysis

• For (γάρ - gar): A conjunction that introduces a reason or explanation, linking this verse as a logical consequence or amplification of the previous argument (Gal 2:17), which speaks about being found "sinners" if seeking justification in Christ.
• if I rebuild (εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα, ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ - ei gar ha katelusa, tauta palin oikodomō):
  • if (εἰ - ei): Introduces a hypothetical or conditional clause, setting up a contrary-to-fact scenario for the sake of argument.
  • I rebuild (οἰκοδομῶ - oikodomō): From oikodomeō, meaning "to build" or "to construct," but here metaphorically "to re-establish" or "to set up again." It refers to reinstating the Mosaic Law as a principle for justification.
  • what I tore down (ἃ κατέλυσα, ταῦτα - ha katelusa, tauta): Literally "that which I destroyed, these things."
    • tore down (κατέλυσα - katelusa): From katalyo, meaning "to destroy," "to pull down," "to abolish." It refers to Paul's complete abandonment of reliance on the Mosaic Law as a means of salvation. He had "dismantled" the system of seeking righteousness through adherence to legalistic works, moving to Christ by faith (Phil 3:7-9).
    • The phrase "what I tore down" encapsulates the system of Mosaic Law (or the life under the Law) as a basis for justification.
• I prove myself (ἐμαυτὸν - emauton): "Myself." The reflexive pronoun emphasizes that the one who rebuilds the law is self-condemned.
• a transgressor (παραβάτην - parabatēn): From parabatēs, meaning "one who steps across," "a violator of the law," "a lawbreaker." This is the crucial term. If Paul were to rebuild the Law, it would mean that his initial act of abandoning the Law for Christ was a violation of what should have been done. It doesn't mean Paul literally becomes a sinner by rebuilding, but that rebuilding implies that he was wrong in leaving the Law, thereby confirming his initial movement away from the Law was a transgression. It highlights the irreconcilable conflict between two methods for justification: law and grace. If Christ is truly the way, then abandoning the Law was righteous; returning to it would mean Christ's way was a transgression of God's true way (the Law), making him a "transgressor" of what God truly wills for righteousness.

Galatians 2 18 Bonus section

The concept of "transgressor" here carries an ironic or rhetorical weight. Paul is not confessing that he is a transgressor now (under grace), but explaining that if he were to hypothetically validate the law's necessity by rebuilding it, then his previous action of moving from law to grace would be exposed as a transgression. This highlights the absolute nature of God's justification by faith alone. If the old structure of Law-based righteousness is reconstructed, it renders Christ's work unnecessary or insufficient, implicitly suggesting that forsaking that structure in the first place was an error or sin. This challenges the very core of the Judaizers' argument by showing its self-defeating implications. The stark choice between law and grace for righteousness means there is no middle ground or return.

Galatians 2 18 Commentary

Galatians 2:18 succinctly encapsulates Paul's argument against legalism: re-establishing the Mosaic Law as a basis for righteousness, after having received salvation through faith in Christ, is not merely a regression but an illogical self-indictment. When Paul abandoned the Law as a means to stand righteous before God, he was doing so in response to the divine truth revealed in Christ. To return to the Law would imply that his prior abandonment was a sinful act, effectively labeling him, and by extension, the message of Christ's all-sufficient grace, as fundamentally flawed or "transgressing." This would make the cross of Christ redundant (Gal 2:21). The verse serves as a stern warning against attempts to hybridize grace and law for justification, emphasizing their antithetical nature. It forces a choice: either salvation is by perfect law-keeping (impossible for sinful humanity) or it is by God's perfect grace through faith in Christ. Any attempt to rely on the law after trusting in Christ is a rejection of Christ's completed work and effectively labels His path a deviation from truth.