Galatians 2:13 · Bible study
Galatians 2:13 Commentary: The Hypocrisy that Swept Even Barnabas
Greek · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Explore why Barnabas was carried away with Peter's hypocrisy at Antioch, the Greek terms used, and what this reveals about human weakness and the necessity of
Research Summary
- Meaning: Peter's hypocrisy at Antioch spread to other Jewish Christians, sweeping even Barnabas along in dissimulation that contradicted gospel truth.
- Key words: συνυποκρίνομαι (to join in hypocrisy), συναπάγω (to be carried away with), ὑπόκρισις (hypocrisy, acting a part).
- Main debate: Whether Peter's error was doctrinal or merely practical; commentators agree it was a failure of courage, not theology.
- Theological theme: Human weakness and the danger of peer pressure even among the mature; the necessity of confronting error to preserve the gospel's integrity.
- Best use: Teaching on accountability, the power of example, and the courage required to stand for truth in community.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
WEB World English Bible 2000
And the rest of the Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
KJV King James Version 1769
And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And the rest of the Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
and dissemble with him also did the other Jews, so that also Barnabas was carried away by their dissimulation.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
and the rest of the Jews also played the same dissembling part with him; so that even Barnabas was carried away too by their dissimulation.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented: so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y á su disimulación consentían también los otros Judíos; de tal manera que aun Bernabé fué también llevado de ellos en su simulación.
E também com ele os outros judeus fingiram, de maneira que até Barnabé se deixou levar pela hipocrisia deles.
Avec lui les autres Juifs usèrent aussi de dissimulation, en sorte que Barnabas même fut entraîné par leur hypocrisie.
Und mit ihm heuchelten die andern Juden, also daß auch Barnabas verführt ward, mit ihnen zu heucheln.
En ook de andere Joden veinsden met hem; alzo dat ook Barnabas mede afgetrokken werd door hun veinzing.
E gli altri Giudei si misero a simulare anch’essi con lui; talché perfino Barnaba fu trascinato dalla loro simulazione.
A wespół z nim obłudnie się obchodzili i drudzy Żydzi, tak że i Barnabasz uwiedziony był tą ich obłudą.
Вместе с ним лицемерили и прочие Иудеи, так что даже Варнава был увлечен их лицемерием.
其餘的 猶太人 也都隨著 他 裝假，甚至 連巴拿巴 也 隨夥 裝假。
And the rest of the Jews went after him, so that even Barnabas was overcome by their false ways.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · Galatians 2:13
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions agree that Barnabas's fall into hypocrisy at Antioch reveals the power of social pressure even upon faithful leaders. Adam Clarke describes the scene as a “torrent of such an example” that swept away the “gentle, loving-hearted Barnabas.” The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges notes that Peter's error was not false doctrine but a failure of courage, a “want of straightforwardness.” Vincent's Word Studies sharpens the point: the Greek word for hypocrisy (ὑπόκρισις) originally meant playing a part on stage, and here it signals a deliberate concealment of one's true convictions. Barnes and Gill both emphasise that if someone as steady as Barnabas could be carried away, the seriousness of the threat to gospel truth demanded Paul's public rebuke. The consensus is clear: the verse exposes the fragility of human resolve, even among the best, when leadership bends to fear.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: Even close companions of Paul like Barnabas could be drawn into conduct that contradicted their own convictions, showing the vulnerability of all believers to social pressure.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of the hypocrisy | All traditions agree that Peter and the others acted inconsistently with their own convictions. | Some (e.g., Cambridge) emphasize it was a practical failure, not doctrinal error; others argue it implicitly undermined justification by faith. |
| Barnabas's character and fall | Barnabas was a respected leader; his fall shows the power of example. | Whether this incident suggests a lasting rift between Paul and Barnabas (cf. Acts 15:39) or was resolved without fracture. |
| Paul's public rebuke | Paul was right to correct Peter publicly because the issue affected the whole church. | Some see it as a model for church discipline; others caution that Paul's authority was unique and not directly imitable. |
| Timing relative to the Jerusalem council | The incident occurred after the council (Acts 15). | Whether Peter was violating the council's decision or simply yielding to local pressure. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The Antioch church was the first major Gentile Christian community and a launching point for Paul's missionary journeys. After the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), the question of how Jewish and Gentile believers should eat together remained volatile. Peter initially embraced table fellowship with Gentiles, practicing the gospel liberty affirmed at the council. But when emissaries “from James” arrived, likely representing the conservative wing of the Jerusalem church, Peter “drew back and separated himself” (Gal 2:12). His action was not a change of theology but a collapse of nerve. The other Jewish Christians at Antioch followed his lead. Even Barnabas, Paul's longtime partner in cross-cultural mission, was “carried away with their dissimulation” (συναπήχθη, an image of being swept along like debris in a current). This was no small stumble. Paul saw that the very truth of the gospel, that salvation is by grace through faith, not by adherence to Jewish customs, was at stake. The phrase “stood condemned” (Gal 2:11) indicates that Peter's behavior had already judged itself inconsistent with the gospel he preached. In a setting where the church's unity and mission were on the line, Paul's public rebuke was not personal pique but a defense of the good news.
Textual Notes
The consulted commentaries and critical editions note no significant textual variants for this verse. The Greek text is stable across the major manuscript traditions.
Reception History
Early Christian readers found this verse troubling. As the Cambridge Bible notes, “various attempts were made in early times to explain away an incident which seemed to throw discredit on Peter or Paul.” Some fathers, according to Lange's commentary, introduced the gloss κατὰ σχῆμα (“in appearance”) to soften the conflict. Augustine firmly opposed this reading, insisting that the record was literal and that Peter's fall was a demonstration of grace. In later centuries, Protestant commentators used the verse to argue for the fallibility of even the greatest apostles, supporting the principle of sola Scriptura over reliance on church leaders. The verse has also been preached as a caution about the power of bad example, especially among those in positions of influence.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The slip of a saint. Even Barnabas, Paul's trusted coworker and “son of encouragement,” was carried away. This shows that spiritual maturity does not make anyone immune to the pull of the crowd.
- The speed of backsliding. Peter went from open table fellowship to fearful separation in a short time. Hypocrisy can spread through a community fast when leaders compromise.
- The cost of silence. Paul's public rebuke was necessary because the gospel's core truth was in danger. Letting error go unchecked would have undone the freedom Christ won.
Five-point outline
- The context of fear. Peter, knowing the truth, acted out of fear of “those of the circumcision” (Gal 2:12).
- The domino effect. The other Jewish Christians followed Peter's hypocrisy, revealing how influence ripples from leaders to the rest.
- The surprising fall of Barnabas. Barnabas had championed Gentile inclusion at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15). His fall underscores the power of social pressure.
- The nature of hypocrisy. It was not ignorance but concealment, playing a part that contradicted their real convictions.
- The pastoral necessity of confrontation. Paul's rebuke was severe but loving, aimed at restoring truth and unity.
Illustration hooks
- A manager who enthusiastically supported a new diversity policy at work quietly stops enforcing it after pushback from senior colleagues. Good people go along.
- A teenager who knows right from wrong starts adopting the values of a new friend group to avoid awkwardness.
- A church small group that once welcomed everyone changes after a vocal member complains about “those people.” Others do not object.
Questions your congregation is asking
- If Barnabas could fall into hypocrisy, what protects any of us from doing the same?
- When should I speak up about something wrong in my church, and when should I stay quiet?
- How do I know if I am being driven by fear of others rather than love for the truth?
Leading a Discussion
This passage records one of the most painful moments in the early church: Barnabas, the man known as “son of encouragement,” joined in hypocrisy alongside Peter. Why did this happen? And what does it teach us about the pull of peer pressure, even among devoted believers? As you discuss, notice that the text does not excuse Barnabas but includes his fall as part of the problem Paul had to confront.
Discussion questions
- What do we learn about Barnabas from other parts of Scripture (Acts 4:36-37, 11:22-24)? Why does his fall here surprise us?
- Read Galatians 2:11-13 carefully. How did Peter's actions affect the other Jewish Christians? What does this say about the responsibility of leaders?
- The Greek word for “carried away” (συναπήχθη) suggests being swept along. How is this an accurate picture of how peer pressure works?
- Why does Paul call this behavior hypocrisy rather than simply a mistake? What made it more than a personal failing?
- How can Christians today dissemble, act one way in one setting and another in a different setting, in ways that harm the gospel?
- Barnabas knew the truth yet failed to live it out. What can we do to support each other in maintaining integrity under pressure?
- If you had been in the Antioch church, how would you have responded? What would have been the hardest part about standing with Paul against Peter and Barnabas?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Genesis 12:11 | When he had come near to enter Egypt, he said to Sarai his wife, “See now, I know that you are a beautiful woman to look at. |
| Genesis 12:13 | Please say that you are my sister, that it may be well with me for your sake, and that my soul may live because of you.” |
| Genesis 26:6 | Isaac lived in Gerar. |
| Genesis 26:7 | The men of the place asked him about his wife. He said, “She is my sister,” for he was afraid to say, “My wife”, lest, he thought, “the men of the place might kill me for Rebekah, because she is beautiful to look at.” |
| Genesis 27:24 | He said, “Are you really my son Esau?” He said, “I am.” |
| Job 15:12 | Why does your heart carry you away? Why do your eyes flash, |
| Ecclesiastes 7:20 | Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and doesn’t sin. |
| Ecclesiastes 10:1 | Dead flies cause the oil of the perfumer to produce an evil odor; so does a little folly outweigh wisdom and honor. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke stresses that this was outright hypocrisy: Jewish Christians who knew the law's obligation had ended still pretended otherwise out of fear. The pressure of bad example was so strong that even Barnabas, gentle and loving as he was, was swept into this pretense.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes observes that Peter's dissembling led other Jewish Christians to conceal their true practice of eating with Gentiles. The fact that even Barnabas, Paul's intimate companion, was carried away into this hypocrisy made Paul's public reproof a painful but necessary duty to protect the church's integrity.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
Peter's error at Antioch was a failure of conduct, not a false doctrine. He acted against his own better judgment out of fear, a pattern of boldness followed by timidity that matches his character in the Gospels. The record warns that even apostles were morally imperfect, yet comforts
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The note highlights how contagious hypocrisy proved to be in this situation. Even Barnabas, who had earlier stood with Paul, was led astray by the pretence of the other Jewish believers. No one was immune to the pressure of outward conformity.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill stresses that the Jews who joined Peter in his hypocrisy were not the visitors from James but local believers who had previously eaten freely with Gentiles. He notes that even Barnabas, a faithful companion of Paul, was swept along by Peter's bad example. This leads Gill to warn that leaders must set careful examples, since even godly people are powerfully influenced by those they respect.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB distinguishes this incident from other New Testament passages about Christian liberty. Here the issue strikes at the gospel's core: whether Gentiles must adopt Jewish customs to be justified. They also note the irony that even Barnabas, who first preached to idolatrous Gentiles, was swept into hypocrisy through the power of bad example and numbers.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry sees Peter's withdrawal from eating with Gentiles as a serious hypocrisy that effectively denied the gospel. The fact that even Barnabas was carried away shows how dangerously contagious such compromise was. Paul's public rebuke was essential to uphold the truth that justification comes through faith in Christ alone.
Vincent's Word Studies Evangelical 1887
Vincent stresses that the hypocrisy at Antioch was not mere pretense but a deliberate concealment of their own more liberal convictions. By acting as if they still held the narrow Pharisaic view, Peter and the others publicly denied the better spiritual insight they truly possessed.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley highlights the forceful nature of the hypocrisy at Antioch, describing how the other Jewish believers dissembled with Peter so powerfully that even Barnabas was swept along like a torrent. The point is that peer pressure can carry even the most faithful into wrongdoing.