Paul"s fear was not that he had been preaching an erroneous gospel. It was that the false teachers who were saying Gentile converts had to become Jews before they could experience justification might undercut his work (cf. Acts 15:1). [source][source][source]
". . . Paul could never tolerate any presentation of Christianity which regarded it as a form of Judaism." [1][source]
James , Peter, and John agreed with Paul, the proof of which was their willingness to let Titus remain uncircumcised. Circumcision was a rite by which Gentile males became Jewish proselytes. [source][source][source]
"Within the crosscurrents of political messianism and apocalyptic speculation, the idea grew that the Messiah would only come when the Holy Land had been purified of all uncircumcised Gentiles." [2][source]
Context Summary
Galatians 2:1-10 - Stand Firm For Truth
The great controversy in Paul's career was over the initial rite of Judaism. It would have been comparatively calm, if he had been willing to admit that Christianity was a sect of Judaism, and that men must become Jews before becoming Christians. His contention was that the ceremonial aspect of the Law did not apply to converts from heathendom. Gentile sinners had the right to go directly to Jesus Christ for salvation, without traveling around the circuitous route of Judaism. When men insisted on the outward rite, he resisted it with all the fiery vehemence of his nature, Galatians 2:3; Galatians 2:12. But when his opponents were willing to admit that circumcision was not essential, he administered it to one of Jewish blood, as a concession to the weak and uninstructed, Acts 16:3.
What blessed intercourse the four men here named must have enjoyed together! James would tell of the earlier biography of Jesus, in the home of Nazareth; Peter would dwell upon his own fellowship with Christ throughout our Lord's active ministry; John would unfold Jesus' inner life, as he afterwards did in his Gospel; Paul would tell of that revelation of the risen Christ on the Damascus road. Note that God must work in and for us, if we are to succeed in the gospel ministry. See Galatians 2:8. [source]
Chapter Summary: Galatians 2
1He shows when he went up again to Jerusalem, and for what purpose; 3and that Titus was not circumcised; 11and that he resisted Peter, and told him the reason; 14why he and others, being Jews, believe in Christ to be justified by faith, and not by works; 20and that they live not in sin, who are so justified
Greek Commentary for Galatians 2:3
Being a Greek [ελλην ων] Concessive participle, though he was a Greek. [source]
Was compelled to be circumcised [ηναγκαστη περιτμητηναι] First aorist passive indicative of αναγκαζω anagkazō and first aorist passive infinitive of περιτεμνω peritemnō Curiously enough some scholars interpret this language to mean that Paul voluntarily had Titus circumcised, instead of being compelled to do it, an impossible view in my opinion in the light of Galatians 2:5 and wholly inconsistent with the whole context. Paul means that he stood his ground against compulsion and all force. [source]
Neither [οὐδὲ] More correctly, not even. So far were they from pronouncing my labor in vain, that not even Titus was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek. Though approving Paul's preaching, the apostles might, for the sake of conciliation, have insisted on the circumcision of his Gentile companion. [source]
Being a Greek [Ἕλλην ὤν] Or, although he was a Greek. Const. closely with σὺν ἐμοι, withme. It was a bold proceeding for Paul to take an uncircumcised Gentile with him to the conference at Jerusalem. [source]
Was compelled to be circumcised [ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι] That is. no constraint was applied by the Jerusalem church and its authorities for the circumcision of Titus. The statement is not that such an attempt was pressed but successfully resisted, but that circumcision was not insisted on by the church. The pressure in that direction came from “the false brethren” described in the next verse. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Galatians 2:3
Acts 6:1Grecians [Ἑλληνιστῶν] Rev., much better, Grecian Jews, with Hellenists in margin. “Grecians” might easily be understood of Greeks in general. The word Hellenists denotes Jews, not Greeks, but Jews who spoke Greek. The contact of Jews with Greeks was first effected by the conquests of Alexander. He settled eight thousand Jews in the Thebais, and the Jews formed a third of the population of his new city of Alexandria. From Egypt they gradually spread along the whole Mediterranean coast of Africa. They were removed by Seleucus Nicator from Babylonia, by thousands, to Antioch and Seleucia, and under the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes scattered themselves through Asia Minor, Greece, Macedonia, and the Aegean islands. The vast majority of them adopted the Greek language, and forgot the Aramaic dialect which had been their language since the Captivity. The word is used but twice in the New Testament - here and Acts 9:29- and, in both cases, of Jews who had embraced Christianity, but who spoke Greek and used the Septuagint version of the Bible instead of the original Hebrew or the Chaldaic targum or paraphrase. The word Ἕλλην , Greek, which is very common in the New Testament, is used in antithesis, either to “Barbarians” or to “Jews. ” In the former case it means all nations which spoke the Greek language (see Acts 18:17; Romans 1:14; 1 Corinthians 1:22,1 Corinthians 1:23). In the latter it is equivalent to Gentiles (see Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9; 1 Corinthians 10:32; Galatians 2:3). Hence, in either case, it is wholly different from Hellenist. [source]
Acts 15:2The brethren appointed [εταχαν] “The brethren” can be supplied from Acts 15:1 and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb εταχαν etaxan Certainly Titus (Galatians 2:1,Galatians 2:3), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. The apostles and elders Note one article for both (cf. “the apostles and the brethren” in Acts 11:1). “Elders” now (Acts 11:30) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution. [source]
Acts 15:2Certain others of them [τινας αλλους] Certainly Titus (Galatians 2:1,Galatians 2:3), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. [source]
Acts 16:3He took and circumcised him [λαβων περιετεμεν αυτον] Any one could perform this rite. Paul had stoutly resisted circumcision in the case of Titus, a pure Greek (Galatians 2:3,Galatians 2:5), because the whole principle of Gentile liberty was at stake. But Timothy was both Jew and Greek and would continually give offence to the Jews with no advantage to the cause of Gentile freedom. So here for the sake of expediency, “because of the Jews” Imperfect active in indirect assertion where ordinarily the present υπαρχει huparchei would be retained, possibly indicating that his father was no longer living. [source]
Galatians 5:2Christ will profit you nothing [] Circumcision is the sign of subjection to the Jewish “yoke” - the economy of the law. The question with the Galatians was circumcision as a condition of salvation. See Galatians 2:3,Galatians 2:5; Acts 15:1. It was a choice between salvation by law and salvation by Christ. The choice of the law involved the relinquishment of Christ. Comp. Galatians 2:21. Chrysostom says: “He who is circumcised is circumcised as fearing the law: but he who fears the law distrusts the power of grace: and he who distrusts gains nothing from that which he distrusts.” [source]
What do the individual words in Galatians 2:3 mean?
Butnot evenTituswho [was]withmea Greekbeingwas compelledto be circumcised
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular
Root: Ἕλλην
Sense: a Greek either by nationality, whether a native of the main land or of the Greek islands or colonies.
Greek Commentary for Galatians 2:3
Concessive participle, though he was a Greek. [source]
First aorist passive indicative of αναγκαζω anagkazō and first aorist passive infinitive of περιτεμνω peritemnō Curiously enough some scholars interpret this language to mean that Paul voluntarily had Titus circumcised, instead of being compelled to do it, an impossible view in my opinion in the light of Galatians 2:5 and wholly inconsistent with the whole context. Paul means that he stood his ground against compulsion and all force. [source]
More correctly, not even. So far were they from pronouncing my labor in vain, that not even Titus was compelled to be circumcised, although he was a Greek. Though approving Paul's preaching, the apostles might, for the sake of conciliation, have insisted on the circumcision of his Gentile companion. [source]
Or, although he was a Greek. Const. closely with σὺν ἐμοι, withme. It was a bold proceeding for Paul to take an uncircumcised Gentile with him to the conference at Jerusalem. [source]
That is. no constraint was applied by the Jerusalem church and its authorities for the circumcision of Titus. The statement is not that such an attempt was pressed but successfully resisted, but that circumcision was not insisted on by the church. The pressure in that direction came from “the false brethren” described in the next verse. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Galatians 2:3
Rev., much better, Grecian Jews, with Hellenists in margin. “Grecians” might easily be understood of Greeks in general. The word Hellenists denotes Jews, not Greeks, but Jews who spoke Greek. The contact of Jews with Greeks was first effected by the conquests of Alexander. He settled eight thousand Jews in the Thebais, and the Jews formed a third of the population of his new city of Alexandria. From Egypt they gradually spread along the whole Mediterranean coast of Africa. They were removed by Seleucus Nicator from Babylonia, by thousands, to Antioch and Seleucia, and under the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes scattered themselves through Asia Minor, Greece, Macedonia, and the Aegean islands. The vast majority of them adopted the Greek language, and forgot the Aramaic dialect which had been their language since the Captivity. The word is used but twice in the New Testament - here and Acts 9:29- and, in both cases, of Jews who had embraced Christianity, but who spoke Greek and used the Septuagint version of the Bible instead of the original Hebrew or the Chaldaic targum or paraphrase. The word Ἕλλην , Greek, which is very common in the New Testament, is used in antithesis, either to “Barbarians” or to “Jews. ” In the former case it means all nations which spoke the Greek language (see Acts 18:17; Romans 1:14; 1 Corinthians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 1:23). In the latter it is equivalent to Gentiles (see Romans 1:16; Romans 2:9; 1 Corinthians 10:32; Galatians 2:3). Hence, in either case, it is wholly different from Hellenist. [source]
“The brethren” can be supplied from Acts 15:1 and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb εταχαν etaxan Certainly Titus (Galatians 2:1, Galatians 2:3), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. The apostles and elders Note one article for both (cf. “the apostles and the brethren” in Acts 11:1). “Elders” now (Acts 11:30) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution. [source]
Certainly Titus (Galatians 2:1, Galatians 2:3), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. [source]
Any one could perform this rite. Paul had stoutly resisted circumcision in the case of Titus, a pure Greek (Galatians 2:3, Galatians 2:5), because the whole principle of Gentile liberty was at stake. But Timothy was both Jew and Greek and would continually give offence to the Jews with no advantage to the cause of Gentile freedom. So here for the sake of expediency, “because of the Jews” Imperfect active in indirect assertion where ordinarily the present υπαρχει huparchei would be retained, possibly indicating that his father was no longer living. [source]
Circumcision is the sign of subjection to the Jewish “yoke” - the economy of the law. The question with the Galatians was circumcision as a condition of salvation. See Galatians 2:3, Galatians 2:5; Acts 15:1. It was a choice between salvation by law and salvation by Christ. The choice of the law involved the relinquishment of Christ. Comp. Galatians 2:21. Chrysostom says: “He who is circumcised is circumcised as fearing the law: but he who fears the law distrusts the power of grace: and he who distrusts gains nothing from that which he distrusts.” [source]