ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτὸν, φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς.
163
13. καὶ συνυπε-
κρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, ὥστε καὶ Βαρνάβας συναπήχθη
αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει.
14. ANN ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθοποδοῦσι πρὸς
τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, εἶπον τῷ Kya! ἔμπροσθεν πάντων, Εἰ σὺ, ᾿Ιουδαῖος ὑπάρχων, ἐθνικῶς ζῇς καὶ οὐκ ᾿Ιουδαϊκῶς, πῶς 3 τὰ ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις ᾿Ιουδαΐζειν ; 15. ἡμεῖς φύσει ἸΙουδαῖοι, καὶ οὐκ ἐξ
1Knoq SABC 17, εἰς. ; Πετρφῳ DEFGKLP, 3 πως NABCDEFGP; τι KL.
ge. 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 hypo- crisy, and fidelity to the Greek text almost demands that rendering here. The men who had hitherto eaten with the uncir- cumcised 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.—xat 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 re- presentative in Jerusalem, and his with- drawal 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 inti- mate 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 min- istry. 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 mo- ment to yield to the influence of Peter and the brethren from Jerusalem!
Ver. 14. πρὸς τ. ἀλήθειαν. Our ver- sions render πρός, according to, like κατά: and so impugn these men for want of uprightness in their conduct rather than for inconsistency of doctrine. But the
censure of the Apostle is really directed to the falsehood of their teaching. They were not dealing straightforwardly with the truth in casting the slur of unclean- ness on those whom God had cleansed in Christ.—avayxdfers. Peter was by his example really putting a severe pressure on Gentile converts to adopt a Jewish rule of life, though perhaps unintention ΙΙΥ.--ὑπάρχων. This participle notes the bearing of antecedents on present action. Peter being a Jew might have been expected to act otherwise.
Vv. 15-21. JEWS THEMSELVES WERE DRIVEN TO RESORT TO CHRIST AS SIN- NERS FOR PARDON BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT OBTAIN JUSTIFICATION BY PERFECT OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW—NOT THAT THEY MIGHT THEREBY BECOME MORE FREE TO SIN, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF NEW LIFE IN CHRIST, EVEN AS PAUL HIMSELF ENDURED CRUCIFIXION WITH CHRIST, THAT CHRIST MIGHT LIVE IN HIM. Ver.15. As the next verse opens, according to the Greek MSS.., with εἰδότες δὲ, it is necessary to understand here a finite verb, We are Fews, etc.
The personal narrative breaks on abruptly at this point. Peter drops out of sight, and the Epistle passes from a protest against his vacillation into an elaborate argument against the doctrinal errors of the Pharisaic party, which forms too integral a portion of the whole Epistle to be detached from it. Yet the new strain of thought springs so directly out of the previous remonstrance that it might well have been addressed there and then to the Jewish Christians at Antioch, The outspoken protest against an insidious attempt to force on Gentiles the Jewish rule of life leads naturally to an enquiry what this rule has done for men who are Jews by birth. Did it justify them before God? We know that it did not: they had to turn to Christ for the peace with God which the Law could not give. In short, vv. 15-21 are con- nected at once with the preceding matter