article15

§10 Paul’s Record of His Conversation with Peter (Gal. 2:14–17)

2:14 / Paul records that he challenged Peter by saying “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?” In the Greek construction the first clause is an “if clause” (“If you, though a Jew”), and Paul’s challenge works on the basis that the “if clause” is true. The resulting question is, how then does it make sense for Peter to compel Gentiles to live in a Jewish manner? It is a curious retort, since from the way that Paul recounts the Antioch incident it appears as if the issue was that Peter was expecting Jews to live in a Jewish manner. It is likely that Paul styles the retort he gave at Antioch so that it fits the Galatian situation, in which Gentiles are being compelled to live like Jews. As Paul presents his confrontation with Peter he continues to play on the theme of Peter’s hypocrisy, underscoring that Gentiles cannot be required to adopt Jewish practice on the basis of Peter’s actions or authority. The same Greek word translated “force” (anankazeis) is used here and in 2:3, where Paul describes how Titus was not “compelled [or forced] to be circumcised” at Jerusalem, even though Peter was there. This repetition of the word brings home Peter’s hypocrisy: at one point he agreed that it was acceptable to commune with Gentiles, but at Antioch, perhaps under the influence of the same group who helped the false believers to sneak into the Jersualem meeting (2:4), Peter is willing to reverse his position and compel Gentiles to live like Jews.

The Greek verb orthopodousin, translated in the phrase not acting in line, gives the impression that Paul was willing to allow some room for error to those who had not had such a direct revelation of the truth of the gospel as he had been privileged with, as long as they were heading on the right course. But Paul considers that by their actions at Antioch Peter and the others got off the road that leads toward the truth. Consequently when Paul saw this he challenged Peter in front of them all. Thus Paul was the courageous defender of truth in a situation comparable to the one in which the Galatians find themselves.

2:15–16 / Before their conversion the Galatians were pagans, so when Paul writes we who are Jews he is obviously referring to himself and the Jewish Christians he addressed at Antioch. This suggests that verse 15 is part of Paul’s record of his words to Peter. Rehearsing what Peter had come to know and believe—that a person is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ—Paul exposes more clearly the fact that Peter acts contrary to his convictions. Paul reminds Peter that he and others have put their faith in Christ Jesus that they may be justified by faith in Christ. Given that Peter, like Paul, is a Jew by birth, such faith is all the more remarkable. Peter’s Jewish background would have emphasized the centrality and nonnegotiability of the law for justification. Thus when Peter accepted the “truth of the gospel” and began to live “like a Gentile and not like a Jew,” he, like Paul, had made a significant break with his Jewish roots. After faith in Christ he recognized that observing the law did not make one righteous. Paul’s statement in verses 15–16 emphasizes that if even he and other Jews have come to know that a person is not justified through the law but rather through faith in Christ, then Gentiles, such as the Galatians, should not be tempted to follow law.

By underscoring that Peter and the others are born Jews, Paul distinguishes between their Jewish ethnicity and their new “in Christ” religious identity and foreshadows what will be a major theme in his letter. While Paul’s adversaries may try to discredit his law-free gospel as the product of a misguided traitor, Paul asserts that his gospel is in line with God’s promises and revelation to the Jewish people (see 3:6–20). As always, God’s revelation comes to the Jews first. Paul and some other Jewish Christians know that justification comes from faith in Christ and not from observing the law. To bolster his point and underscore the continuity of his gospel with Judaism Paul uses a scriptural quotation—no one will be justified (Ps. 143:2).

Paul chooses to refer to non-Jews as Gentile sinners rather than as Gentiles, his more customary term. He is likely trying to unmask the mistaken presuppositions of the Jewish Christians: that for believers the distinction between Jew and Gentile remains.

The Jewish world regularly referred to non-Jews, who were without the law, as “sinners.” For instance, the author of the Jewish apocalyptic book Jubilees speaks of “the sinners, the gentiles” (23:24; see also 1 Sam. 15:18; 1 Macc. 1:34; Tobit 13:6; Psalms of Solomon 1:1; 2:1). As the psalm says, the blessed person is one whose “delight is in the law of the Lord” (Ps. 1:2). In Jewish writings contemporary with Paul the effectiveness of the law for producing virtue was contrasted favorably with Greek philosophy. Philo, while recognizing that virtue was to be found in all peoples, extolls the life of the Jewish group known as the Essenes, who dedicated themselves to rigorous observance of the Jewish law. He calls them “athletes of virtue produced by a philosophy free from the pedantry of Greek wordiness” (Good Person 88 [Colson, LCL]).

The phrase “faith in Christ” occurs three times in verse 16. It has been argued that Paul is not really repeating himself, and that the first and third instance of this phrase refer to the faithfulness of Christ and the second instance refers to the faith of the believer (see Introduction). The Greek phrases pisteōs Iēsou Christou in the first instance and pisteōs Christou in the third may be rendered as subjective genitives. Verse 16 would then read: “knowing that a person is justified not through works of the law but through Jesus Christ’s faith. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by Christ’s faith, and not by doing the works of the law.”

The Greek word translated “justified” (dikaioutai) is the verb from the same root as the noun “righteousness,” a noun that is also translated at times as “justice.” Righteousness was the goal of Jewish religion. As Deuteronomy 16:20 says, “Follow justice (dikaiosynē) and justice alone.” The Jewish faith held that God’s character is righteous and the point of observing the law was to begin to take on the character of God—righteousness. Paul was convinced that in Christ God had revealed God’s righteousness in an unprecedented way (Rom. 1:17; 3:21). The consequence of the death and resurrection of Jesus is that the “righteousness of God” is now available to those who have faith in Jesus Christ and are “in Christ.”

Righteousness, or justice, was also a concern of ancient Greek philosophers. Plato’s Republic deals extensively with the issue of justice. Aristotle regards justice, along with courage, as the most important virtue (Rhetoric 1.9.1366b). Plutarch regards justice as the most enviable virtue, saying that “the common folk … do not merely honour the just … they actually love the just, and put confidence and trust in them” (Cato the Younger 44.8 [Perrin, LCL]). To be just was to be like a god (Plutarch, Aristeides 6.2).

The battle between Paul and his opponents, then, was over convincing the Galatians not of the desirability of righteousness but of the correct means of becoming righteous. The hook that the rival evangelists had in the Galatians was that their way—the way of works of law—resonated both with the Jewish tradition to which Paul’s converts were attracted and with the Greek philosophical tradition that thought virtue was achieved through human agency (e.g., Aristotle, Eth. nic. 3.3.13).

The final phrase of verse 16 reads literally “by works of law all flesh (sarx) will not be justified.” Flesh for Paul has several different meanings. It refers to bodily existence, in which case it has a neutral, straightforward meaning (4:13–14). It also has theological meaning. The “flesh” is not justified (2:16) but is capable of being transformed through faith (2:20 reads lit. “the life I now live in the flesh”). Flesh is opposed to Spirit (3:3; 5:16) and remains a dynamic in the Christian life—a force that tempts the believer to serve its needs rather than God and the needs of others (5:13, 16).

2:17 / There is some question whether verse 17 should be read as a question Paul is now putting to his Galatian hearers or as a question he asked of Peter at Antioch. The continued use of we suggests that Paul is still recounting what he said to Peter at Antioch. If this is so then the absolutely not! at the end of the verse would be Peter’s exclamation as he comes to grips with the theological consequence of separating himself from Gentiles believers.

The Jewish Christian opponents of Paul’s law-free gospel work with the presupposition that the only remedy for sin is the law. To be without the law is to be a sinner. Paul’s response in verse 17, which is clarified in verse 21, is that for these Jewish Christians to place their trust in the law is to reject the work of Christ, for “if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing.” To regard the law as necessary for dealing with sin is to think that Christ promotes sin. If the law is added to the gospel, the logical conclusion would be that Christ is inadequate to deal with sin and that a Christ-centered, law-free gospel promotes sin.

For Paul it is either Christ or the law: there can be no compromise. As he says later, “if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you” (5:2); and “you who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace” (5:4). To rely on the law to curb sin and attain righteousness is to reject Christ. Such a result is, Paul hopes, unthinkable for his Galatian readers, and so when he records Peter’s emphatic “absolutely not,” Paul expects that his readers will join with him in discarding the preposterous idea that Christ promotes sin. Paul hopes that through this demonstration he may dispel the influence of the rival evangelists.

Paul’s choice of the words seek to be justified in Christ may be more than descriptive. He appears also to be making a value judgment—striving is antithetical to what it means to be in Christ. Paul uses a type of “if” clause that indicates that his readers are in fact striving for justification in Christ. He criticizes their framework (giving credence to law) and their method (effort).