12for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction.
Orthodox Icons are not drawings or creations of imagination. They are in fact writings of things not of this world. Icons can represent our Lord Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. They can also represent the Holy Trinity, Angels, the Heavenly hosts, and even events. Orthodox icons, unlike Western pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event. (Source )
The Greek that is translated as “to fear” or “to be afraid” or similar in English is translated in Ashe as agõõi iwei or “hearing fear.” (Source: David Rowbory)
The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin that is often translated as “gentiles” (or “nations”) in English is often translated as a “local equivalent of ‘foreigners,'” such as “the people of other lands” (Guerrero Amuzgo), “people of other towns” (Tzeltal), “people of other languages” (San Miguel El Grande Mixtec), “strange peoples” (Navajo (Dinė) (this and above, see Bratcher / Nida), “outsiders” (Ekari), “people of foreign lands” (Kannada), “non-Jews” (North Alaskan Inupiatun), “people being-in-darkness” (a figurative expression for people lacking cultural or religious insight) (Toraja-Sa’dan) (source for this and three above Reiling / Swellengrebel), “from different places all people” (Martu Wangka) (source: Carl Gross).
Tzeltal translates it as “people in all different towns,” Chicahuaxtla Triqui as “the people who live all over the world,” Highland Totonac as “all the outsider people,” Sayula Popoluca as “(people) in every land” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Chichimeca-Jonaz as “foreign people who are not Jews,” Sierra de Juárez Zapotec as “people of other nations” (source of this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), Highland Totonac as “outsider people” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Uma as “people who are not the descendants of Israel” (source: Uma Back Translation), “other ethnic groups” (source: Newari Back Translation), and Yakan as “the other tribes” (source: Yakan Back Translation).
In Chichewa, it is translated with mitundu or “races.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
The Hebrew and Greek terms that are translated as “circumcise” or “circumcision” in English (originally meaning of English term: “to cut around”) are (back-) translated in various ways:
Tetelcingo Nahuatl: “put the mark in the body showing that they belong to God” (or: “that they have a covenant with God”)
Indonesian: disunat — “undergo sunat” (sunat is derived from Arabic “sunnah (سنة)” — “(religious) way (of life)”)
Ekari: “cut the end of the member for which one fears shame” (in Gen. 17:10) (but typically: “the cutting custom”) (source for this and above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Following are a number of back-translations of Galatians 2:12:
Uma: “At first he did not discriminate Yahudi and non-Yahudi people, he ate together with the followers of Yesus who are not Yahudi people. But when several companions of Yakobus arrived from Yerusalem, he distanced himself from the followers of Yesus who were not Yahudi people. He was no longer brave to eat with them because he was afraid those Yahudis who had just arrived would be surprised at him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “When he first arrived there, he ate with the people not Yahudi who trust Isa Almasi. But after/when some Yahudi trusting in Isa Almasi arrived commanded by Yakub to go there, Petros no longer paid-attention to the not Yahudi and he no longer ate with them. Petros was afraid (that) the Yahudi who defend the law of circumcision might find-fault with him.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Now somewhat a long time after that, Peter came to us (excl.) in the town of Antioch. When he first arrived his behavior was proper, for he gathered together to eat with believers who weren’t Jews. But when some Jewish believers that James had sent arrived, he began avoiding eating with the people who aren’t Jews. And I rebuked him because it was quite clear that what he was doing was not right. The reason he avoided it was because he was afraid because he might be scolded for that action these Jewish believers who say that it’s necessary for the non-Jewish believers to be circumcised.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Because when he had just-come, he always (appreciation particle) ate-with our brothers who are Gentiles. But when Jews arrived who had been sent by Santiago, he gradually stopped-doing-it and didn’t eat-with the Gentiles, because he was afraid of the party/group of Jews who insisted that the law of Moses be followed.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “For at first he followed the custom of us (excl.) believers there that whether Jews or not, we (excl.) would all eat together. There was no discrimination. But when some Jews arrived from the ones under the oversight of Santiago at Jerusalem, Pedro became afraid that they might scold him, therefore he no longer ate with the believers who weren’t Jews. He was now tabooing them. Because those ones who had arrived, they were among those people who were saying, it is indeed necessary for non Jews to be circumcised, even though they have believed/obeyed Cristo.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “At the first Peter had done what was good. He ate along with the believers who did not have the mark which the Jews have. Then there arrived other people who came from where James was, these were people who required that all believers who were not Jews be marked. After they arrived, Peter was afraid that they would be angry with him, therefore he parted from where the believers who were not marked were.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
This verse and the following explain what Peter did that led to Paul’s public denunciation of him. When Peter first arrived, he had no difficulty joining in the mixed fellowship, but afterwards, at the instigation of, or for fear of, some men, he refused to have anything to do with the Gentiles.
One of the principal difficulties involved in the translation of this verse results from the temporal relations as reflected in the various tense forms and temporal conjunctions, for example, before, had been sent, arrived, had been eating, after, drew back, and would not eat. A special complication occurs in the first sentence of this verse in which the conjunction before goes with the verb arrived, while there is an embedded relative clause of prior time, who had been sent by James. It may, therefore, be necessary to restructure the order and arrangement of elements within this verse, for example, “James had sent some men to Antioch, but before they arrived there Peter had been making it a practice to eat with the Gentile believers. But after these men arrived there, he refused to continue eating with them. He did this because he was afraid of those who said that the Gentiles should be circumcised.”
Had been eating is in the imperfect tense in the Greek, indicating that Peter did this not only once, but regularly. The phrase itself may refer either to regular meals, or to the fellowship meals, that is, the meals which were part of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. In either case, the Jews would have some problems in a mixed group, since the Jewish law forbade Jews to eat with Gentiles because of the danger of eating food declared by the Law to be unclean, that is, forbidden because it made one impure before God. In Antioch, Peter went against this particular regulation and regularly joined the Gentile Christians in their meals. Some languages have a so-called repetitive form of verbs, and this would fit in well in this context, that is to say, “he had been repeatedly eating with believers who were not Jews.”
Gentile brothers (literally “Gentiles”) are Gentile members of the congregation. Good News Translation makes explicit the fact that Peter did not eat with all the Gentiles, as a literal translation might suggest, but only with Gentile Christians.
The occasion for Peter’s withdrawal is the arrival of some men who had been sent by James (literally “some men from James”). The Greek of this phrase is ambiguous. What is clear is that these men were connected in some way with James, but it is not clear whether they were sent by James (as understood by Good News Translation, also Moffatt “emissaries of James”) or were simply members of the Jerusalem church but whose visit to Antioch was not ordered by James (Jerusalem Bible “certain friends of James arrived”; Phillips “the arrival of some of James’ companions”).
He drew back and would not eat with the Gentiles is literally “he was drawing back and separating himself.” Because of the imperfect tense of the two verbs in the Greek text, some commentaries understand this to represent a process: Peter did not take this step all at once, but gradually (Knox “he began to draw back,” also Moffatt). Furthermore, some commentaries understand “was separating himself” in the general sense of Peter’s withdrawal from associating with the Gentiles (Jerusalem Bible “kept away from them altogether”; New English Bible “he drew back and began to hold aloof”). Some, however, interpret this separation in a more specific sense, that is, referring back to the eating of meals just mentioned (so Good News Translation, compare Phillips “he withdrew and ate separately from the Gentiles”). In some languages the equivalent of drew back would be expressed negatively, for example, “he did not continue to associate with” or “he refused to continue association with.” In certain languages the relation is expressed somewhat idiomatically, for example, “he put a distance between himself and the Gentile believers.”
Those who were in favor of circumcising them translates what is literally “those of (the) circumcision.” While this could be interpreted as meaning simply “those who were circumcised” (New American Bible), that is, the Jews (Phillips “out of sheer fear of what the Jews might think”), it could refer to a party within the Christian community at Antioch which favored the circumcision of Gentile Christians but more likely to those Jewish Christians who had been sent by James (Jerusalem Bible “for fear of the group that insisted on circumcision”; New English Bible “he was afraid of the advocates of circumcision”). In some instances one may also translate “those who said, The Gentile believers must be circumcised,” or “… Someone must circumcise the Gentile believers.”
Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1976. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
The clause “certain men came from James” (in 2:12a) describes what happened after Peter had been eating with the Gentiles (2:12b). In some languages, it will be more natural to change the order of these two clauses. For example:
b He ate with people who were not Jewish a until some men James had sent ?from Jerusalem? arrived. (God’s Word) -or-
b Peter used to eat with the Gentiles, a ?but then? some men from James arrived.
2:12a
For: Verse 2:12 explains why Paul rebuked Peter. The Greek introduces this explanation with a conjunction that the Berean Standard Bible translates as For.
Some other ways to introduce this explanation are:
?I rebuked him? because -or-
?I did this? because -or-
Here’s what was happening:
Some English versions do not translate this conjunction. For example:
Before certain men came from James (New International Version)
In some languages, it may not necessary to use a conjunction here either.
before certain men came from James: There are two ways to interpret the way that these certain men were connected to James :
(1) They were sent from/by James. (James was the leader of the church at Jerusalem.) And they came with a message from James. For example:
Before some men who had been sent by James arrived there (Good News Translation)
(Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, God’s Word, New Century Version)
(2) They came from the church in Jerusalem where James was the leader. But they came with their own message, not a message from James. According to this interpretation, these Jewish believers are the same men mentioned in Acts 15:24. This verse in Acts tells us that these men were not sent by the leaders in Jerusalem, although they had come from the church there. For example:
some Jewish friends of James came (New Living Translation (1996))
Many English versions are ambiguous, and so it is not possible to tell which interpretation they follow. It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1), with the majority of English versions that express a specific interpretation.
Some other ways to translate this clause are:
until some men James had sent ?from Jerusalem? arrived (God’s Word) -or-
when some Jews arrived whom James had sent
As mentioned above, it may be more natural to put this clause after 2:12b. See an example above and in the Display.
certain men: The phrase certain men refers to some Jewish believers.
2:12b
he used to eat with the Gentiles: This clause indicates that, in the past, Peter had regularly eaten with the Gentiles, but then he stopped.
Jews were not allowed to eat with non-Jews, because they thought that they became unclean by doing so. When Peter, a Jew, ate with the Gentiles, it showed that he accepted them and had close fellowship with them. This was how Peter behaved when he first arrived in Antioch.
Some other ways to translate this clause are:
Peter had been eating with the Gentile believers (Good News Translation) -or-
at first, he always/regularly ate with Gentile Christians
the Gentiles: Here, the phrase the Gentiles refers to the Christians in Antioch who were not Jews and did not follow the Jewish laws.
Another way to translate this clause is:
Gentile believers
2:12c
But when they arrived: There is a contrast between Peter eating with the Gentile believers and Peter separating himself from them. Many English versions introduce this contrast with the word But.
Some other ways to translate this clause are:
But after these men arrived (Good News Translation) -or-
After they came ?to Antioch?
2:12d
he began to draw back and separate himself: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as draw back also means “withdraw” or “retreat.” This verb and the verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as separate himself are very similar in meaning. These verbs imply that Peter stopped eating with the Gentiles.
The forms of both Greek verbs also imply that Peter gradually began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentile believers at meals. He did not do it all at once.
Some ways to translate this clause are:
• Find synonyms to translate these two verbs. For example:
he gradually withdrew and began to keep himself away ?from the Gentile believers?
• Translate one verb as “stopped eating.” For example:
he gradually avoided/stopped eating ?with the Gentile believers? and began to not associate with them -or-
little by little Peter started retreating ?from the non-Jewish believers? and no longer ate with them
• Translate both verbs as one. For example:
he gradually distanced himself from believers who were not Jews -or-
soon stopped eating with Gentiles (Contemporary English Version)
2:12e
for fear of those in the circumcision group: There are at least two ways to interpret the Greek phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as the circumcision group :
(1) It is a specific term referring to the group of Jews who insisted that a man must be circumcised in order for God to accept him. For example:
He was afraid of those who insisted that circumcision was necessary. (God’s Word)
(2) It is a general term for all Jews. (All Jewish men were circumcised.) For some unspecified reason, Peter was afraid of, or concerned about, these people. For example:
Peter was afraid of the Jews (Contemporary English Version)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). In Galatians, Paul showed that is it not necessary for a man to be circumcised in order to be saved, and interpretation (1) is consistent with that.
Furthermore, this circumcision party could have been:
(a) a group of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem whom the men from James told Peter about.
(b) Jewish militants who were not Christians and were persecuting Jewish Christians. It is possible that the men from James told Peter about these men.
(c) the men from James themselves
In your translation, you should not specify which group it was.
Some other ways to translate this clause are:
He was afraid of those who insisted that circumcision was necessary. (God’s Word) -or-
he was afraid of those who were in favor of circumcising them (Good News Translation) -or-
He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. (New Living Translation (2004))
Peter was perhaps afraid that this group would not approve of him eating with Gentile believers. He was perhaps afraid of what they would think or say about him. He was not afraid that they would physically harm him. If this party was (b) above, he may have even feared that his actions could cause Jewish militants to persecute Jewish believers.
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
.jpg){kind=link}
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.