^ 
 
 s) 
 
 
 
-* ^ 
 
 l2ff6X}^ 
 
 ^^*. •'**"'"««<::' 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 Shelf 
 
 Division 
 
 Section . r\ ^ I jO 
 
 Number yj.^..y<^ 
 
AN 
 
 AMERICAN COMMENTARY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 ALVAH HOVEY, D.D., LL.D. 
 
 V 
 
 PHILADELPHIA . 
 AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 
 
 3420 Chestnut Street. 
 
COMMENTARY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Epistle to the Galatians. 
 
 BY 
 
 ALVAH HOVEY, D. D., LL.D. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 
 AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 
 
 1420 Chestnut Street. 
 
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year IBQO, by the 
 
 AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 
 
 in the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at "Washington. 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 There are a few general questions in respect to such a writing as the Epistle to the 
 Galatians which should be answered, if possible, before attempting an explanation of its 
 language, paragraph by paragraph, and verse by verse. They relate to the writer, the 
 readers, the occasion, the structui-e, and the date of the Epistle, together with the influ- 
 ence which it has had upon Christian doctrine and life, and the use which has been made 
 of it in modern controversy. Correct answers to these questions will lighten the inter- 
 preter's work, and render it more useful to the reader. 
 
 I. THE WRITER. 
 
 This Epistle purports to have been written by the Apostle Paul (1 : 1), and it is num- 
 bered by Eusebius among his undisputed writings. "The epistles of Paul are fourteen, 
 all well known and beyond doubt. It should not, however, be concealed that some have 
 set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it was disputed as not being one of 
 Paul's epistles." ("Hist. Eccl.," III. 3.) This statement deserves full confidence, for 
 Eusebius was acquainted with a considerable body of Christian literature produced in the 
 first three centuries, and current at tlie beginning of the fourth, but since lost, and his 
 account of the estimate which had been i)ut upon the several books of the New Testament, 
 down to his own time, has never been successfully impeached. 
 
 His statement is also confirmed by the earliest versions, for this Epistle is found, in 
 connection with the other epistles of Paul, in the Syriac and Old Latin Versions which 
 are assigned to the Second Century, and in the Egyptian, which was probably completed 
 before the middle of the Third. It is clearly recognized in the Muratorian Canon not 
 later than A. D. 170, and is contained in all the early manuscripts of the epistles of Paul, 
 {E. g., xABCDEFa.)' 
 
 The statement of Eusebius is still further confirmed by the language of Irenaeus 
 "Against Heresies " (111.13:3; 6:5; 7:2; 18:7; 21:1; 22:1; V. 3 : 5 ; 11:1; 
 21 : 1 ; 32 : 2), according to the old Latin translation, which is, of course, less decisive 
 than the original Greek would have been ; by the argument of Tertullian, in his treatise 
 "Against Marcion" (V. 2-4), which attributes the Epistle to Paul, and reasons from it as 
 if it were accepted by Marcion, who rejected many books of the New Testament ; by 
 quotations from it in the writings of Clement of Alexandria ("The Pedagogue," I. 6, 11, 
 and "Stromata," III. 15), who sometimes mentions the name of Paul, and, at others, 
 calls him simply "the apostle"; and by the words of Origen (e. g., on Rom. 3 : 27, 29) 
 as translated by Rufinus. Jerome says that Origen "wrote five volumes on the Epistle 
 of Paul .to the Galatians," but only three fragments of this commentary have been pre- 
 served in a Latin translation, 
 
 6 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 Having Kuch evidence of its genuineness, we need not appeal to traces of an acquaint- 
 ance with this Epistle on the jtart of the AjHjstolical Fathers, who do not specify tlic New 
 Testanjent books from which th(;y quote. Yet their writinjfs furnish a degree of proof, 
 not altogether unwelcome, that this Epistle was extant at the beginning of the Second 
 Century. (See Cleiuent of K(;nie od Corinth. 3:1; Ignatius ad Polyc. 1 ; Polycarp ad 
 V\n\. cc. 3, 5, 0, VI.) 
 
 It is well known that the Epistle to the Galatians is one of the four which were 
 recognized by F. C. JJuur as genuine, and that the principal writers of his school have 
 agHM.'d with their master in this respect. To say nothing of other reasons for their 
 opitii<m, it must bo admitted that the character of these four epistles affords the clearest 
 evidence of their genuineness, for they are intensely real and practical. "They deal with 
 specific evils ; they refute definite errors ; they repel particular slanders ; they check 
 given disorders; they assert special rights ; they prescribe rules for the treatment of dis- 
 tinct offenses. Sharp logic, open rebuke, fervid appeal, generous praise, follow one 
 another in quick succession. What lov(! to those addressed glows in the writer's lan- 
 guage ! What readiness to be spent in their service ! What downright horiesty, fidelity, 
 and greatness of soul breathe in every page ! These sentences were called forth by the 
 wants of living men, or we may close up the volume of history. Whoever can look upon 
 them as spurious, must have lost the sense of reality, the power of distinguishing between 
 the actual and the ideal, and may well despair of findir)g anything trustworthy in all the 
 records of the past." (Quoted from the author's sermon in "Madison Avenue Lectures.") 
 It is incHidible that either of these letters was written by any other luan than the 
 
 Apostle Paul. 
 
 II. THE llEADEliS. 
 
 The churches addressed by Paul in this Epistle were located in Galatia, a middle 
 province of Asia Minor, one third larger than ]*alestine west of the Jordan, and inhabited 
 by a mixed population of Phrygians, Gauls, (ireeks, Jews, and I'omans. Speaking in a 
 g(;neral way, the llomaris were there as civil or military officers, with their attendants and 
 soldiers, and naturally formed a class by themselves, sufjcrior to tlie rest of the people, 
 and distinct from them in social life. The Jews were there, as in all parts of Asia Minor, 
 for traffic ; and, to accomjilish the purpose of tlieir foreign residence, they must have 
 mingled in business with men of every class. The Greeks also were there for a somewhat 
 similar purpose, and in such numbers that their language became the medium of general 
 intercourse, Vjcing understood by all the more intelligent peojde. JJut all these were, 
 nevertheless, to a certain degree foreigners. On the other hand, the IMirygians were the 
 original possessors of the land, yet, since B. C. 241, if not 279, a period of not less tlian 
 three centuries, they had been a subject race in Galatia, less influential, and pcjrhaps less 
 numerous, than the Gauls ; for the latter, a restless swarm from the full Celtic liive of 
 Western Eurrjpe, had given their name to the province conquered by them, and, it is be- 
 lieved, had also imparted somewhat of their special temperament to the Christian churches 
 founded among them by I^iul. 
 
 " Galatia," says Jjightfoot, " was parceled out among the three tribes of which the in- 
 vading Gauls were composed in the following way: the Trocmi occupied the easternmost 
 jiortion, bordering on C'i{)padocia and Pontus, with Tavium, or Tavia, as their chief town ; 
 tli(! Tolistobogii, who Wfire situated to the west, on the frontier of IJithynia and Phrygia- 
 Epictetus, fixfid upon the an(;i(!tit Pessinus for their capital ; the Tectosages setthwJ in the 
 centre, between the other two tribes, adopting Ancyra as their seat of government, re- 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 7 
 
 garded also as the metropolis of the whole of Galatia." All these tribes were subjugated 
 to the Roiuan power by the Consul Manlius iu 189 B. c, and the whole territory was 
 made a Roman province by Augustus in 25 B. c. This was its civil status when visited 
 by Paul, three quarters of a century later, the Eastern Gauls having learned, with their 
 Western kiiisnien, the futility of resisting the niiglit of Inijjerial Rome. 
 
 Rut what were tlie characteristics of the (Jcltic race, as descrihed Ity classic writers? 
 And how do they agree with the traits wliich api)ear to haves distinguished the (ialatian 
 Christians addressed by Paul ? 'J'iie Roman and Greek writers speak of the Celts, or 
 Gaula, as men of large stature, white skin, blue eyes, and light-colored hair. They refer 
 to their ingenuity and versatile talent ; to their warlike sjjirit and desperate courage ; to 
 tlieir restless activity and predatory life. JJut they accuse them of fickleness, intemi)cr- 
 ance, and superstiticjn. Yet acomiietent modern scholar affirms that "a braver set of men 
 never faced the enemy than the (Jalli with whom Caesar fouglit. Most of them were chil- 
 dren of poverty, brought up to suffer and to die. We often read, at earlier periods, of their 
 losing, through intemperance, the fruits of a hard-fought battle; but nothing of this kind 
 appears in the Gallic wars." (George Lovo, in "Diet, of Gr. and Rom. Geog.," page 904.) 
 Caesar remarks that they were "a nation greatly given to superstitions" (rdif/ionihiis). 
 And it will hardly be denied that, as a race, they were ardent, imjjulsive, and brave, but 
 at the same time rash, unstable, and, i)erhaps, volatile. This description, drawn from 
 classic sources, accords in a very striking manner with the suggestions of the K])istle to 
 the Galatians as to the character of the persons who received that Epistle. 
 
 But it may be presumed that some of those addressed were of Plnygian descent, and 
 the question may be asked, Wliat sort of men were the Phrygians? As previously stated, 
 they appear to have been the earliest inhabitants of Central Asia Minor. "Their dispo- 
 sition was peaceable. No one of their traditions or legends points to a heroic period in 
 their history, but all have a somewhat mystic or fantastic character. Agriculture was 
 their chief occupation, and they never took or exacted an oath. Tlieir proper divinities 
 were Cybele and Dionysus, called by them Sabazius. With the worship of these deities 
 were connected the celebrated orgiastic rites, accompanied by wild music and dances, 
 which were subsequently introduced among the Greeks. All that we hear of the religion 
 of the Phrygians during the historical times appears to show that it w;is a mixture of 
 their own original form of worsliip with the less pure rites introduced by the Syro- 
 Phoenician tribes." (Quoted freely from Leonhard Schmitz, in "Diet, of Gr. and Rom. 
 Geog.," II., page G23.) It may then be conjectured, from all that is known of the 
 mixed population of Galatia, that the churches founded by Paul were composed chiefly of 
 persons of Gallic or Phrygian descent, the former being f;ir more influential tlian the 
 latter, while there was in all of them a small fraction of Greeks, Jews, and po.ssibly 
 Romans. 
 
 III. THE OCCASION. 
 
 In his second missionary journey (a. d. 51 or 52) Paul preached Christ for the first 
 time in Galatia. (Acts IG : 6.) The people received the apostle with great kindness and 
 respect (Gal. 4 : 13, 14), many of them becoming followers of the Lord Jesus. About 
 three years later (t. e., in the autumn of A. D. 54, or early in A. n. 55), he revisited the 
 churches of this province (Acts 18 : 27), and was led by what he saw to warn them in 
 strong language against perversions of the gospel which he had preachfid to them ((Jal. 
 1 •.9.) Already, therefore, it may be presumed, had Judaistic doctrines been broached 
 among them, and listened to with some degree of favor. But the apostle's urgent protest 
 
8 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 against those doctrines seemed to be effectual, and he left them, doubtless, with the feeling 
 that anj' danger to their faith had been averted. 
 
 Yet he was mistaken. The Judaizing zealots ere long resumed their efforts, asserting 
 that Gentiles could not be saved without being circumcised and obeying the law. Their 
 influence was so great that, within a comparatively short time (Gal. 1 : 6), many were 
 almost persuaded to submit to the rite of circumcision. They must have impugned the 
 apostolic authority of Paul, partly by laying stress on the fact that he had never been 
 taught by Christ himself, but had obtained his knowledge of the gospel at second hand, 
 and partly by saying that his doctrine was different from that of Peter and James, who 
 observed the Jewish law. 
 
 How many adversaries of Paul appeared in the Galatian churches, it is impossible to 
 ascertain ; but it is safe to conclude that they were Jewish Christians, rather than simply 
 Jews, for the latter would have urged the Galatians to renounce Christ and obey Moses, 
 instead of teaching them to supplement the gospel with the law. We may also assume 
 that this movement did not spring from the churches themselves, but that it came to 
 them from abroad, and perhaps from Palestine. Compare Acts 15:1; Gal. 2 : 12. 
 
 But whether these perverters of the gospel were few or many, were from Palestine or 
 some other place, they were so plausible in their criticism of Paul's authority as an 
 apostle, or so persuasive in their reasoning for obedience to the law as a condition of ac- 
 ceptance with God, or so earnest and urgent in their assertions and appeals, that their 
 Celtic hearers were greatly moved, and on the point of yielding submission to the new 
 doctrine. This was the emergency which called for the Epistle to the Galatians, and with 
 assertion most direct, and argument most powerful, and appeal most tender, did the 
 apostle meet the emergency. 
 
 IV. THE STRUCTURE. 
 
 This was evidently determined by the object to be accomplished, and, viewed in that 
 light, it is perfectly logical and clear. Indeed, it would be difficult to find anywhere a 
 better specimen of cogent and persuasive writing. The first two chapters assert and 
 establish Paul's claim to a knowledge of Christian truth as original and complete as that of 
 the earlier apostles. It had been received by him from Christ by direct revelation, and it 
 comprised all the f\icts and principles essential to the gospel of the grace of God. 
 
 The next two chapters verify the truth and sufficiency of that gospel by an appeal 
 to the experience of his readers when and since they received it, by an exposition of 
 the way of life according to the ancient Scriptures, and by a statement of the relation 
 of the law of God to his promise, of Mosaic legalism to justification through faith in 
 Christ. 
 
 And the last two chapters warn the Galatians against any misapprehension or abuse 
 of his doctrine by explaining the operation of faith and exhorting them to a holy life in 
 the freedom which belongs to sons of God. 
 
 A fuller and beautiful analysis of the apostle's course of thought is quoted, in con- 
 nection with the successive paragraphs of the Epistle, from an article by Dr. Hackett in 
 the "Christian Review" for October, 1861, pages 577-584. 
 
 V. THE DATE. 
 
 This may be placed without hesitation after Paul's second visit to Galatia, on his 
 third missionary journey (Acts 18 ; 23), and either during his residence of more than two 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 9 
 
 years ia Ephesus (Acts 19 : 8, 10, 22), or his visit to Macedonia and Corinth thereafter. 
 (Acts 20 : 1-3.) In this period the most interesting group of his epistles was written; 
 namely, those sent to the Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. And the question to be 
 answered is this : Was the Epistle to the Galatians written in the first part of his residence 
 in Ejihesus, or dm-ing his visit to Macedonia and Corinth? Was it written before the 
 two Epistles to the Corinthians, or after them? For careful interpreters agree that the 
 Epistle to the Romans was probably written later than any other belonging to this group. 
 The principal argument for dating it in the early part of his sojourn at Ephesus is 
 drawn from (lal. 1 : 6 — ''I marvel that ye are SO SOON removing from him that called 
 you in the grace of Jesus Christ unto another gospel" — for "so sooa" (owrws raxews) is 
 thought to imply that only a short time had passed since his last visit to them, or, possi- 
 bly, since their conversion. A change taking place after three years would not have been 
 thus characterized. Indeed, most of those who rely on this argument believe that only a 
 few months could have elapsed between the earlier events which the apostle has in mind 
 and the change in the state of the churches which called forth his letter — i. e., betweea 
 his last visit to them and the letter he was writing. 
 
 But the inference from these words seems to me precarious. (1) Because the 
 terminus a quo is by no means certain. It may have been the titue when the Judaizing 
 teachers began, or resumed, their efforts to shake the confidence of the Galatians in the 
 apostle and his gospel. If anything in the context forbids this, it must be the words, 
 "from him that called you in the grace of Jesus Christ," which refer to their conversion 
 more than three years (if not six) previous to his writing this Epistle. But Paul's refer- 
 ence to their conversion, as a work of God's grace in Christ Jesus, agrees with the whole 
 strain of argument in the Epistle, and can easily be accounted for without assuming that 
 it was the date from which he reckoned in using the words "so soon." (2) Because, as 
 Lightfoot remarks, "it is possible that 'soon' (raxeW) here may signify 'readily, rashly,' 
 that is, 'quickly' after the opportunity is oflFered, a sense which the present tense, are 
 turning renerjades (^"a-weecree)^ would facilitate. See 1 Tim. 5 : 22 ; 2 Thess. 2:2. In 
 this case there will be no reference to any independent point of time." The sole refer- 
 ence would be to the quickness or rapidity of the change. Hence the argument from 
 Taxe'oi! is untrustworthy. 
 
 But the reasons for thinking that this Epistle was written a short time before the 
 Epistle to the Romans appear to me of real weight. And the most important of these is 
 the remarkable coincidence of thought and expression in many passages of the two letters. 
 The following instances of similarity are adduced by Lightfoot in his Introduction to this 
 Epistle : (1) Gal. 3 : 6=Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3 : 7=Rom. 4 : 10, 11 ; Gal. 3 : 8=Rom. 4:17; 
 Gal. 3 : 9=Rom. 4 : 23 ; Gal. 3 : 10=Rom. 4:15; Gal. 3 : ll=Rom. 3 : 21, seq. ; Gal. 3:12= 
 Bom. 10:5; Gal. 3 : 13, 14=Rom. 4 : 23, 24 ; Gal. 3 : ]5-18=Rom. 4 : 13, 14, 16 ; Gal. 
 3 : I9-21=Rom. 7 : 1-3 ; Gal. 3 : 22=Rom. 11 : 32 ; 3 : 9, 10; Gal. 3 : 23-26=Rom. 
 7:1-3; Gal. 3 : 27=Rom. 6:3; 13:14; Gal. 3 : 29=Rom. 9:8; Gal. 4 : .5, 6, 7= 
 Rom. 8 : 14-17. (2) Gal. 2 : 16=Rom. 3 : 20. (3) Gal. 2 : 19=Rom. 7:4, cf 6 : 2-5 ; 
 Gal. 2 : 20 (cf 5 : 24 ; 6 : 14)=Rom. 6 : 6, 8, 1 1. (4) Gal. 4 : 23, 28=Rom. 9 : 7, 8. (5) 
 Gal. 5 : I4=Rom. 13 : 8, 9, 10. (6) Gal. 5 : 16=Rom. 8:4; Gal. 5 : 17=Rom. 7 : 23, 25 ; 
 Gal. 5 : 17=Rom. 7 : 15 ; Gal. 5 : ]8=Rom. 8 : 2. (7) Gal. 6 : 2=Rom. 15:1. These 
 parallels render it extremely probable that the two epistles were written about the same 
 time, or within two or three months of each other. 
 
 And it is no less evident that the Epi.stle to the Galatians was written before, rather 
 
10 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 than after, the Epistle to the Romans, for the former reads like a first draft, and not like 
 a condensation of the latter. The ampler and calmer unfolding of doctrine in the Epistle 
 to tlie Romans agrees with all the circumstances of the case, if we assume : (1) that the 
 Epistle to the Galatians was written under the excitement of intense anxiety occasioned 
 by a sudden and dangerous crisis in the churches addressed ; (2) that those churches were 
 saved from apostasy, and fixed in their adhesion to Ciirist as the only Saviour, by means 
 of this letter ; and (3) that, two or three months later, relieved of his extreme anxiety 
 CoDceniing the cliurch at Corinth and the cliurches of Galatia, yet sensible of the un- 
 wearied activity of tlic Judaizing party, and wishing to forestall its work in Rome, he 
 wrote the greatest of his epistles to the Christians of that city, and set forth in it with 
 elaborate care, on the lines which he had sketched in his earlier epistle, the gospel of the 
 grace of God through the death of Christ for the sins of men. 
 
 It seems probable, therefore, that the Epistle to the Galatians was written early 
 in A. D. 58, soon after Paul's arrival in Corinth, or while he was on his way to that city. 
 
 • VI. USE AND MISUSE. 
 
 As students of the German Reformation are aware, Martin Luther prized this Epistle 
 very highly, and commented on it frequently. In it he discovered the marrow of the 
 gospel : the doctrine of justification through faith in Christ. "It is very necessary," he 
 wrote, " that this doctrine be kept in continual practice and public exercise, both of read- 
 ing and hearing. It can never be taught, urged, and repeated enough. If this doctrine be 
 lost, then is iilso the doctrine of truth, life, and salvation, lost and gone. If this doctrine 
 flourishes, then all good things flourish ; religion, the true service of God, the glory of 
 God, the right knowledge of all things which are necessary for a Christian man to 
 know." (Preface, page 130.) The Epistle to the Galatians has been one of the clearest 
 sources of evangelical truth since the Bible was put in the hands of the people. 
 
 But it has also been compelled to serve those who deny the divine origin of the 
 gospel which it teaches. "The earliest form of Christianity," it is argued, "was a modi- 
 fied Judaism. The distinctive features of the system current under this name were added 
 by St. Paul. There was an irreconcileable opposition between the apostle of the Gentiles 
 and the apostles of the Jews — a personal feud between the teachers themselves, and a 
 direct antagonism between their doctrines. After a long struggle, St. Paul prevailed, and 
 Christianity — our Christianitj' — was the result." (Lightfoot, Introduction, page 66.) 
 An impartial study of the Epistle will, however, lead to a different conclusion — a conclu- 
 sion that the account which Paul gives of his relation to the other apostles is worthy of 
 entire confidence. And, if so, there was no personal feud between the apostles, and no 
 radical diff"erence between them as to the true way of life through Christ, but, on the 
 contrary, a full recognition, after suitable proof, of Paul's apostolic mission and doctrine, 
 on the part of James, Peter, and John, together with an amicable division of the work 
 of evangelization between them and him. To build upon this Epistle such a theory as 
 that of Baur is, therefore, I am persuaded, a misuse of its language which will not bear 
 the test of unbiased criticism. 
 
 Note. — Among the works consulted with profit in the preparation of this commentary, 
 besides the grammars of Winer and Buttmann, are the commentaries of Lightfoot, 
 Ellicott, Jowett, Howson, Sanday, Schaff", Beet, and Luther (translated) in English, with 
 those of Sioff"ert-Meyer, Ruckert, De AVctte, and Wieseler in German, and those of 
 Calvin and Bengel in Latin, while, in f?tudying some of the doctrinal passages, the works 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 11 
 
 of Usteri ("Der Paulinische Lehrbegriff "), Messner ("Die Theologie der Apostel"), 
 and Weiss ("Theology of the New Testament"), have been examined. The writer is 
 also greatlj' indebted to his former teacher, Dr. H. B. Hackett, not only for the Analysis 
 which he published first in the "Bibliotheca Sacra," and later, with additions, in the 
 "Christian Review" for 18G1, 577-584, but also for his articles in the "Bibliotheca 
 Sacra," XIX., 211-225, and XXII., 138-149, on the translation of several passages of 
 the Epistle, and for the eloquent oral exposition of the whole Epistle which he gave to 
 the class of 1848 in tbe Newton Theological Institution, as preserved in notes and a 
 paraphrase written at the time. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PAUL, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but 
 by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised 
 him from the deaa ; ) 
 
 1 Paul an apostle (not from men, neither through 
 1 man, but through Jesus Christ, aud God the Father, 
 
 1 Or, a mau. 
 
 Ch. 1 : 1-5 : Address and Greeting. — 
 "In the introduction," says Dr. Hackett, 
 "Paul asserts in the strongest manner the 
 divine origin of his apostleship, and his ap- 
 pointment to it witiiout any human interven- 
 tion ; and invokes on the Galatians the usual 
 benediction from God the Father and the 
 Lord Jesus Christ. In this connection he 
 brings incidentally into view the sacrifice and 
 death of Christ as the means of human salva- 
 tion, and thus announces the great theme of 
 the Epistle at the outset. (1 : 1-5.)" See 
 " Christian Review" for 1861, page 578. 
 
 1. Paul — called Saul in the earlier chapters 
 of the Acts. (7:58; 8:1; 9:1,4, 8.) The name 
 ' Paul ' appears for the first time in Acts 13 : 
 9, after the apostle had entered upon his dis- 
 tinctive missionary work among the Gentiles. 
 Saul is a Hebrew, and Paul a Roman name. 
 The meaning of the former is asked for, and 
 the meaning of the latter little. The resem- 
 blance in sound must be considered accidental. 
 Probably both names were given him in child- 
 hood, as by descent he was a Jew or Hebrew 
 (Phil. 3 : 5), and in civil standing a Roman. 
 (Acts 16 : 37; 22 : 25-28.) Apostlc — uscd here in the 
 highest Christian sense of the word to denote 
 one specially commissioned to preach the gos- 
 pel. The apostles held the first place under 
 Christ in his kingdom. See 1 Cor. 12 : 28, seq. ; 
 Eph. 4 : 11. In addressing his epistles to the 
 Thessalonians, Paul had made no reference to 
 his apostleship, doubtless because it was ad- 
 mitted without question by them ; but now, 
 writing to churches in which his equality with 
 the original apostles had evidently been de- 
 nied, he asserts it promptly and positively at 
 the outset, and in his later epistles he does the 
 same thing vvith more or less emphasis. Not 
 of (or, froTYi) men. These words deny that 
 his commission was of human origin. This 
 denial may have been called forth by the in- 
 sinuations of Judaizing teachers, who had 
 
 appeared in Galatia, that his authority was 
 derived from men, perhaps from the church at 
 Antioch. Neither by man (or, nor through 
 a man). By this added clause Paul denies 
 that any man had been the medium or chan- 
 nel through which his commission to serve as 
 an apostle had been made known to him. It 
 was in.no sense or degree human. Doubtless 
 it had been urged in favor of the higher dig- 
 nity of the earlier apostles that they had been 
 commissioned by the lips of Christ himself, 
 while Paul must have received his commis- 
 sion through some one who was a disciple be- 
 fore him. But by (throtigh) Jesus Christ — 
 who had appeared to him on the way to Da- 
 mascus (ac»3 9:3, seq. ; 26: 16-18), and had pointed 
 out at that early day the special work which 
 he was to perform. Even if we suppose that, 
 according to Luke's narrative in Acts 9 : 3, 
 seq., Jesus Christ made use of Ananias as his 
 mouthpiece, the words of Christ to Paul ren- 
 dered the language of Ananias virtually 
 Christ's language, and the apostle was there- 
 fore justified in treating it as such, overlooking 
 the human agency. And God the Father 
 — that is, his apostolic commission was con- 
 veyed through Jesus Christ, who is insepar- 
 ably united in action with God the Father, so 
 that Christ's action is really his Father's action 
 as well. In this case, at least, what Jesus did 
 the Father did. The expression 'Father' is 
 best understood as moaning here the Father 
 of Jesus Christ. Who raised him from the 
 dead. This seems to have been added be- 
 cause it was not during his earthly life that 
 Jesus appeared to Paul and made him an 
 apostle; it was rather after his resurrection 
 and ascension. And that resurrection was the 
 work of his Father, though not in such a sense 
 as to exclude his own participation in it. The 
 meaning of the Greek expression, translated 
 'from the dead' (« vtKpi,v), is explained by 
 Winer( "Grammar," p. 123), as follows: "'the 
 
 13 
 
14 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. L 
 
 2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the 
 churches of Galatia: 
 
 3 Grace be to you, and peace, from God the Father, 
 and from our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 
 4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might de- 
 liver us from this present evil world, according to the 
 will of God and our Father: 
 
 2 who raised him from the dead), and all the brethren 
 who are with me, unto the churches of Galatia: 
 
 3 Grace to you aud peace i from God the Father, 
 
 4 and our I-ord Jesus Cbrist, who gave himself for 
 our sins, that he might deliver us out of this pres- 
 ent evil 2 world, according to the will of ^ our God 
 
 1 Some ancienc authorities rend from God our Father, and the Lord Jeaua Christ 2 Or. age 3 Or, God and our Father. 
 
 dead' appears to signify 'the assembly of the 
 dead.'" See also Thayer's " Lexicon of the 
 New Testament," on the word vexpo^. 
 
 2. And all the brethren which (that) are 
 with me. This does not mean all the mem- 
 bers of the church where he was, or all the 
 Christians that happened to be present with 
 Paul when he indited this letter, but rather 
 'all the brethren who are at present my com- 
 panions in travel and preaching.' Thus, when 
 writing to the Thessalonians, he associated 
 with himself Silvanus and Timothy in his 
 salutation to the church. In the present case 
 he forbears to give the names of his associates 
 in labor, though he must have communicated 
 to them his purpose of writing the letter, and 
 very likely tiie substance of the letter itself 
 Unto the churches of Galatia — that is, the 
 churches located somewhere in the province 
 of Galatia. It maybe inferred that they were 
 not all in one city, but were independent bod- 
 ies found in different places. None of them 
 can be positively a.ssigned to particular cities, 
 as Ancyra, Pessinus, or Tavium. 
 
 The entire absence of commendation in this 
 address is worthy of notice. The Christians 
 to whom he writes are simply 'churches.' He 
 can pray for them, but he is now in no mood 
 to praise them. Deeply agitated by what he 
 has heard of their fickleness and inclination to 
 Judaism, he has no heart to speak in this place 
 of the evidences of divine life in those to whom 
 he writes. 
 
 3. Grace be to you, and peace. 'Grace' 
 is unmerited favor, and when it is God's favor 
 its natural result is 'peace.' From God the 
 Father. According to Westcott and Hort, it 
 should be 'God our Father,' the pronoun 
 'our' being connected with ' Father' and not 
 with ' Lord.' But the common reading has 
 more support in the uncial manuscripts and 
 the early versions than the reading adopted 
 by Westcott and Hort. It should therefore be 
 preferred. And {from) our Lord Jesus 
 Christ. Here ' grace and peace ' are supposed 
 to come from Christ as well as from the Father. 
 
 The preposition 'from' is connected with both 
 names, and marks them equally as sources of 
 grace and peace; not one as the source and 
 the other as the medium, but both as the 
 source ; a form of expression consistent with 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, but inconsistent 
 with any other view of Christ's relation to the 
 Father. Paul conceived of divine grace as 
 coming from Christ as well as the Father. 
 
 4, Who gave himself for our sins — that 
 is, delivered himself up to death with refer- 
 ence to our sins, or on acccount of our sins — 
 that is, to make expiation for them. See 3 : 12, 
 seq., and Rom. 3 : 23, seq. This submission 
 to death for the expiation of ' our sins' was in 
 order to something further which is named 
 in the next clause. 
 
 That he might deliver us from {out of) 
 this present evil world {age). 'The pres- 
 ent age' is here described as morally evil, be- 
 cause the men who give character to it are 
 wicked. Compare with this language the 
 words of Paul in the last part of the first chap- 
 ter to the Romans. There can be no doubt of 
 the awful moral condition of mankind in all 
 parts of the known world when the apostle 
 wrote this Epistle. Of course, deliverance out 
 of the present evil age must mean deliverance 
 out of its influence and its doom, a deliver- 
 ance which could only be effected by rescuing 
 men from the power and the penalty of sin. 
 According to the will of God and {even) 
 our Father. This expression is to be con- 
 nected with the words 'gave himself for our 
 sins,' as modified by the end sought, ' that he 
 might deliver us,' etc. The voluntary death 
 of Christ which was prerequisite to the salva- 
 tion of men, is here declared to have been in 
 accord with the will of God, who is at the same 
 time characterized as 'our Father." The pro- 
 noun 'our' naturally refers to Paul and his 
 readers, regarded as Christians, and therefore 
 to all who are the children of God by adop- 
 tion. See Rom. 8: 15-17. It cannot be safely 
 interpreted as representing mankind, irrespect- 
 ive of union with Christ. The Greek original 
 
Ch. I.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 15 
 
 5 To whom he glory for ever and ever. Amen. 
 
 6 I marvel tbat ye are so soon removed from him 
 thai called you into the grace of Christ unto another 
 gospel : 
 
 5 and Father : to whom be the glory i for ever and ever. 
 Ameu. 
 
 6 1 marvel that ye are so quickly removing from 
 him who called you in the grace of Christ unto a 
 
 1 Gr. unto the ages of the ages. 
 
 may, however, be translated 'according to the 
 will of our God and Father'; and this trans- 
 lation is preferred by Liglitfoot, on the ground 
 that "tlie article not being necessary before 
 God (9eoD), seems to be added to bind the two 
 clauses togetiier and connect both with 'our' 
 di/ttii')" — literally, 'of us.' But a comparison of 
 the same expression in Phil. 4: 20; 1 Thess.l : 3 ; 
 3: 11, 13, with a somewhat similar expression 
 in Eom. 1 : 7 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 3 ; 2 Cor. 1 : 2, is favor- 
 able to the translation first given. 
 
 5. To whom be (the) glory forever and 
 ever. Amen. It is better to retain the ar- 
 ticle of the original text before the word 
 'glor^',' for the glory referred to must be, 
 either that which is due to God for his gracious 
 will in the work of redemption (see the pre- 
 vious clause), or that which "especially and 
 alone belongs to God" (EUicott), and is there- 
 fore a definite glory. 
 
 Thus the apostle enriches his address and 
 salutation to the churches of Galatia with the 
 principal truths which he is about to defend 
 as the only gospel. Among these truths are 
 the sacrificial death of Christ, his resurrection 
 by the power of God, his divinity and union 
 with the Father, his direct agency in making 
 Paul an apostle, and the fact that all this was 
 done in obedience to the Father's will. 
 
 6-10. Paul's Surprise AT THE Sudden 
 Falling Away of his Headers to an- 
 other Kind of Gospel, and his Denunci- 
 ation OF THOSE WHO TaUGHT IT — A DE- 
 NUNCIATION WHICH IS Natural because 
 
 REDOES NOT SeEK HuMAN FaVOR BUT THE 
 
 Approval of God. — Paul " expresses his as- 
 tonishment at the sudden defection of the Ga- 
 latians from the truth, characterizes the error 
 which they had embraced, or were in danger 
 of embracing, as an utter and fatal perver- 
 sion of the gospel, and pronounces the conduct 
 of those who had perplexed and misled them to 
 be deserving of the severest reprobation and 
 punishment. He takes the ground that the plan 
 of salvation as preached by himself was the 
 true and unalterable way of salvation, and 
 that any different sj^stem, though taught by 
 an angel from heaven, must be rejected at 
 
 once as false, merely on the ground of such 
 difference." (Hackett). 
 
 6. I marvel that ye are so soon re- 
 moved {so quickly removing) from him that 
 called you into {iyi) the grace of Christ 
 unto another gospel. Dr. Hackett translates 
 thus : "I marvel that ye are so soon removing 
 from him who called you in the grace of Christ 
 unto a different gospel." The abruptness 
 with which Paul introduces the occasion for his 
 Epistle reveals his intense and painful anxiety 
 — an anxiety mingled witli surprise and press- 
 ing for expression. The word translated ' mar- 
 vel' occurs very often in the New Testament, 
 and in the Common Version is frequently 
 rendered 'wonder.' It may denote either a 
 
 joyful or a painful surprise (Man. 8:10; Mark 6:6), 
 
 a sudden and powerful emotion occasioned by 
 something that is very admirable or ver3'^ dread- 
 ful, and in either case unexpected. Whether 
 the Greek words translated 'so quickly' 
 have any reference to the short time which 
 had passed since their conversion, or since the 
 apostle's last visit to them, is doubtful. They 
 may refer to the quickness with which the Ga- 
 latians had yielded in some measure to the 
 new doctrine, to the celerity or rapidity with 
 which they were turning a friendly ear to the 
 Judaizing teachers who had come among 
 them. And if so, they furnish no clue to the 
 date of the Epistle. At most, they point to the 
 shortness of the time since the false teachers 
 had begun their evil work in Galatia. Sne 
 Introduction, V. According to the teach- 
 ing of Paul elsewhere, the words 'him that 
 called you' must refer to God the Father 
 (Rom. 8:30), though the Call may have been 
 ministered to them by the Holy Spirit and 
 the word of truth. (zThess. 2: u; Eph. 3:6.) The 
 words ' in the grace of Jesus Christ' are added 
 toshow thatthisdivine calling has its ground 
 or source in Christ. As Christians "were 
 chosen in him before the foundation of the 
 world" (Eph.i:4), so likewisc are they called 
 in his grace. The whole work of salvation 
 springs from him. Hence, according to the 
 Lord himself, prayer is to be offered in his 
 name, and the answer to it from God will come 
 
16 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. I. 
 
 7 WLich is not another; but there be some that 
 trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 
 
 8 liui tlioiigli we, or an angel liom heaven, preach 
 any other gospel unto you than that which we have 
 preached untu you, let hiiu be accursed. 
 
 9 As we said before, so say 1 now again, If any man 
 preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have 
 received, let him be accursed. 
 
 7 different gospel ; i which is not another (/o.?;)^/; only 
 there are some that trouble you, and w ould pervert 
 
 8 the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an augel 
 from heaven, should preacli -unto you any gospel 
 ^olher than that wliich we preaclied unto you, let 
 
 9 him be anathema. As we have said before, so say 
 I now again, If any man preacheth unto you any 
 gospel other than tliat which ye received, let him be 
 
 1 Or, which ia nothing else save that, etc 2 Some ancieut authorities omit unto you 3 Or, contrary to that. 
 
 in his name. (John i6: 23.) Paul is never weary 
 of extolling tiie grace of Jesus Christ. And by 
 the grace of Jesus Christ he evidently means 
 the unmerited favor bestowed on men by rea- 
 son of the voluntary death of Christ in their 
 Lehalf, since he died a just One for unjust. 
 iSee 1 Peter 3: 18. The expression 'another 
 gospel' signifies in the original, 'another sort 
 of gospel' or a gospel ditfering in kind from 
 that which Paul had preached. The adjective 
 here rendered 'another' (eTepoc) is familiar to 
 us in the first syllable of the English word 
 heterogeneous, and is distinct from the word 
 translated ' another ' in the next clause.^ Paul 
 means by it a 'different' gospel. 
 
 7. Which is not another— that is, not 
 another real gospel deserving the name and 
 worthy to be called a second gospel. This it is 
 not, because, though proclaimed as such, it is 
 no gospel at all. But there be some that 
 trouble you, and Avould pervert the gos- 
 pel of Christ. Perhaps it would be wiser to 
 translate the words rendered 'but,' (ei ij-v) 
 'save that' (Ellicott), for such is their ordi- 
 narj' meaning, and to explain the clause as 
 follows: 'AVhich is not another, except in 
 this sense that there are some that harass 
 your minds and wish to pervert the gospel of 
 Christ' ; 'there are some who are troubling 
 you by heir desire and attempt to pervert 
 the gospel.' The thought may also be ex- 
 pressed as follows, 'which is not another,' 
 except that it is a peace-destroying perversion 
 of the gospel; and so, a different kind of gos- 
 pel. In other words, there are those among 
 you whose teaching is no true gospel; but, 
 though dealing with the gospel, and perhaps 
 claiming to improve it, is a complete perver- 
 
 sion of it. " The Judaists bring you another 
 gospel, but it is no gospel at all." (Ellicott.) 
 ' The gospel of Christ' may here signify either 
 the gospel proclaimed by him or the gospel con- 
 cerning him — that is to say, good news issuing 
 from him as its source, or good news concerning 
 him as its object. The latter interpretation is 
 preferable, though certainty cannot be gained. 
 
 8. But though (even if) we, or an angel 
 from heaven, preach any other gospel 
 unto you than that which Ave have 
 preached unto you, let him be accursed 
 — "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, 
 should preach to you any other gospel con- 
 trary to that which we preached." (Hackett.) 
 The Greek expression (irap" &) may mean 'con- 
 trary to that which,' or 'different from that 
 
 which.' (Acts 18 : 13; Rom. 1:26; 1 Cor. 3:11.) The first 
 
 and sharper meaning is preferable here. The 
 expression, ' which we preached (as good 
 news) to you,' must refer to the preaching of 
 Paul and his companions in Galatia, at his 
 first and second visits to that province, the 
 gospel which led to their conversion, and 
 which, until recently, they had cherished as 
 the power of God unto salvation without the 
 help of Judaism. Thus Paul invokes the 
 judgment of God upon any and every one 
 who might pervert the gospel ; and from the 
 tremendous earnestness of his language it is 
 necessary to believe that be had absolute con- 
 fidence in the correctness of his own doctrine. 
 He knew that what he preached was the very 
 truth, as it is in Jesus; and he felt that the 
 preaching of a different gospel would imperil 
 the salvation of men and obscure the grace of 
 God. 
 
 9. As we (have) said before, so say I 
 
 tYet it is not always used in its distinctive sense. 
 Often It appears to be simply equivalent to aAAos. 
 Lightfoot says tliat aAAo? is another as ' one besides,' 
 irtpos another as 'one of two' .... Thus aAAoy 
 adds, while eVepos distinguishes. Now when our atten- 
 tion is confined to two objects, we naturally compare 
 and contrast them ; hence erepo^ gets to signify ' unlike, 
 opposite,' as Xenophon's " Cyropedia, " VIII. '.i, 8 ; Ex. 
 
 1:8. " Thus while aAAos is generally confined to a nega- 
 tion of indentity, erepoj sometimes implies the negation 
 of resemblance." See 2 Cor. 11 : 4, where the two words 
 are used appropriately, as they are here. In many cases, 
 however, they will be interchangeable : compare Matt. 
 11:3 with Luke 7:20. Hesychius explains eVepoi'. 
 aAAoi-' r) aAAoto>'' ij eV Toil' Svolv' rj apuaTtpov, viov 
 &evTtpov. 
 
Ch. L] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 17 
 
 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek 
 to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not 
 be the servant of Christ. 
 
 11 But 1 certify you, brethren, that the gospel which 
 was preached of me is not after man. 
 
 10 anathema. For am I now seeking the favour of men 
 or of Uod? or am I striving to please men? if! 
 were still pKasing men, I ."hould not be a ■ servant 
 of Christ. 
 
 11 For 1 make known to you, brethren, as toucliing 
 the gospel which was preached by me, that it is nut 
 
 1 Gr. bondservant. 
 
 now again, if any man (one) preach any 
 other gospel unto you than that ye have 
 received, let him be accursed. See Re- 
 vised Version.* The apostle doubtless refers 
 in the first clause of this verse not to the pre- 
 ceding verse, but to his preaching, together 
 with others, to the Galatians, when he visited 
 them tlie second time ; and, if so, he must 
 then have detected (or foreseen) the presence 
 of false teachers among them. For tlie im- 
 precation is too strong to have been uttered 
 when there were no signs of peril. From his 
 language in this verse it is also manifest that 
 Paul did not entertain the view which is now 
 somewhat popular — tliat it is of little conse- 
 quence what a man believes, provided his 
 conduct is blameless. He knew that spiritual 
 life must be nourished by truth, and not by 
 error; and he was profoundly disturbed by 
 the danger to which the Galatians were ex- 
 posed. 
 
 But the apostle was aware that such lan- 
 guage would seem to his readers severe and 
 repulsive; therefore he explained his motive 
 for using it. 
 
 10. For do I now persuade men, or 
 God? The word 'persuade' ('am I now 
 persuading') is here used in the sense of con- 
 ciliating; and the apostle meant to affirm by 
 this question that he was writing thus sternly 
 with a view to the friendship of God, rather 
 than the good will of men. In other words, 
 he was not attempting to gain human favor, 
 but divine. And by the next question — Or 
 do I seek (am I seeking) to please men? — 
 he denies with emphasis such a motive for his 
 language, and then adds: If I yet pleased 
 (or, were still pleasing) men, I should not 
 be the servant of Chirst — literally, Christ's 
 bondservant. 'Yet,' or, still; that is, after 
 all his experience. "The Greek for 'yet ' (tVt) 
 does not imply tliat Paul had ever been a time- 
 server." CLightfoot. ) No; but may it not 
 imply that he had often sought to conciliate 
 
 men, though it was no time for him to do this 
 now? 'Now' (apTi) he could not be a bond- 
 servant of Christ, if he were to speak smooth 
 things to the Galatians, or to hesitate to de- 
 nounce those who were leading them to accept 
 a difl'erent gospel, even one that weakened 
 their faith in Christ. Others suppose that he 
 may refer implicitly to what he had done 
 before his conversion. (Hackett.) But this 
 is less probable. 
 
 11, 12-2 : 14. The Apostle Confirms his 
 Teaching by Showing that he had not 
 Received his Gospel from Men, but 
 FROM Jesus Christ Himself, by Direct 
 Revelation. — His theme is stated in verses 
 11 and 12, and its proof is given in the remain- 
 der of this chapter and the first fourteen verses 
 of the next. Says Dr. Hackett: "He claims 
 that his knowledge of the gospel is proved to 
 be not of human, but of divine origin, nega- 
 tively, by the fact that immediately on his 
 conversion he entered on the full exercise of 
 his office as an apostle, without any consulta- 
 tion with human advisers (i:ii-i7); that he 
 preached the gospel for years without any 
 intercourse, or even personal acquaintance, 
 with the apostles; and that when at length he 
 went to Jerusalem and saw some of their 
 number, it was a visit of friendship merely, 
 and had no relation whatever to his attaintnent 
 of a more perfect knowledge of the Christian 
 doctrines, (i : 18-24.) " 
 
 Slightly' diflTerent is the paraphrase of Light> 
 foot: "The revelation of his Son in me, the 
 call to preach to the Gentiles, were acts of his 
 good pleasure. Thus converted, I took no 
 counsel of human advisers. I did not betake 
 myself to the elder apostles, as I might natur- 
 ally have done. I secluded myself in Arabia; 
 and, when I emerged from my retirement, 
 instead of going to Jerusalem I returned to 
 Damascus." 
 
 11-12. Theme. But I certify to you, 
 brethren. The Revised Version is better : For 
 
 ' " As we have said before 
 received." (Hackett.) 
 
 if any one preaches to you any other gospel contrary to that which j9 
 
18 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. I. 
 
 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I I 12 after man. For neither did I receive it from i man, 
 taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. | nor was 1 taught it, but il came lo me through reve- 
 
 1 Or, a man, 
 
 I make known to you, brethren. Documentary 
 evidence in favor of 'for' (yap) slightly out- 
 weighs that in favor of 'but' (S«), and may 
 therefore be followed. The connection of 
 thought is accordingly this : ' If I should seek 
 to please men when the gospel is being per- 
 verted as now, I should not be Christ's faithful 
 bondservant, for this gospel was received by me 
 from Christ himself and so expresses his will.' 
 The formula 'I make known to you' shows 
 that Paul attaches grave importance to what 
 he is about to say. Compare 1 Cor. 12 : 3 ; 
 15: 1; 2 Cor. 8: 1, and the similar phrase, 
 !"I would not have you ignorant," in Kom. 
 .1 : 13 ; 1 Cor. 10 : 1 ; 12 : 1 ; 2 Cor. 1 : 8 ; 1 
 Thess. 4 : 13. Observe, however, that he now 
 addresses the members of the churches of Gal- 
 atia as ' brethren.' They are not, then, in his 
 estimation, apostates from Christ. They have 
 not rejected the gospel of the grace of God. 
 But they are in danger of doing this, for they 
 ' are looking in the wrong direction, giving ear 
 to dangerous error, and involved in a move- 
 ment which, if continued, will separate them 
 from God. And the whole object of his Epis- 
 tle is to arrest this movement and bring them 
 back to steadfast confidence in Christ as their 
 sole and sufficient Saviour. So he addresses 
 them heartily as 'brethren.' That the 
 gospel Avhich was preached of me. Com- 
 pare Revised Version, As totichiyig the gospel 
 which was preached by me. Perhaps the full 
 force of the original would be given by such 
 a rendering as this : " in respect to the gospel 
 which was preached as good news by me" — 
 
 (to €vayyiKi.ov to fvayy(\i.aBiv.) IS nOt alter 
 
 man, or, that it is not after man. That is, 
 it is not of such a nature as it would have 
 been if originated by man, it is not "after 
 any human fashion or standard," it is neither 
 in essence or object such a gospel as accords 
 with human ideas of religion. Evidently 
 Paul did not suppose that his gospel was a 
 fruit of human speculation, or experience, or 
 consciousness. Moral and religious evolution 
 had no place in his conception of the origin of 
 Christianity. He knew of man-made religions, 
 ,and esteemed them wholly unlike the gospel — 
 or the gospel wholly different from them. 
 
 12. For I neither received it of man, 
 neither was I taught it. The 'I' is some- 
 what emphatic, perha))s because there is an 
 unexpressed reference to the older apostles; 
 'for neither did I, any more than the other 
 apostles, receive it from (a) man, for example, 
 Peter.' Sicffert objects to this as improbable, 
 because there has been no allusion thus far to 
 the other apostles, and suggests that the im- 
 plied reference may be to the readers of the 
 Epistle: 'I did not (as did you) receive it 
 from a man.' But according to Buttmann the 
 pronoun is sometimes inserted without being 
 emphatic ; and, if that be the case here, there 
 is no tacit reference in it to any unnamed 
 party. 'Neither (nor) was I taught it.' 
 Lightfoot remarks that this clause was added 
 to explain and enforce the foregoing state- 
 ment, and thus to bring out the contrast with 
 'by revelation': "I received it, not by in- 
 struction from man, but by revelation from 
 Christ." But Ellicott holds that the verb 
 ' was taught' points more to subjective appro- 
 priation, and 'received' to objective. And 
 SiefTert finds the distinction to be simply this, 
 that one verb defines the mode of communi- 
 cation while the other does not. Certainly 
 the second verb is more definite as to manner 
 than the first, and so gives natural progress to 
 the course of thought. But (it came) by 
 (through) the revelation of Jesus Christ. 
 Omit the definite article before revelation as in 
 the Revised Version, and understand that 'of 
 Jesus Christ' means 'proceeding from Jesus 
 Christ.' The Greek word translated 'revela- 
 tion' signifies, literally, an uncovering, un- 
 veiling, disclosing. But in the New Testa- 
 ment it always denotes a disclosure of reli- 
 gious truth before unknown. This disclosure 
 is made to the soul either by God himself or 
 by the ascended Christ, especially through the 
 operation of the Holy Spirit (i Cor, 2 : 10), and is 
 thus distinguished from other modes of in- 
 struction. (Thayer, sub voce.) It maj' be 
 effected in part by a theophany or Christo- 
 phany, but no visible manifestation is neces- 
 sary to it. A partial revelation of Christian 
 truth, before unknown, was made to Paul 
 when Jesus appeared to him on the way to 
 
Ch. I.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 19 
 
 Vi For ye have heard of luy conversation in time 
 past iu the Jews' religinu, liow Ihut beyond measure 
 I persecuted the church <if Ciod, and wasted it: 
 
 H And profiled in the Jews' religion above man^ my 
 equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly 
 eealous of the traditions of my fathers. 
 
 13 lation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of my 
 manner of life in time past in the Jews' religion, 
 how that beyond measure X persecuted the church of 
 
 14 God, and made havock of it: and I advanced in the 
 Jews' religion beyond many of mine own age ^among 
 my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous 
 
 1 Gr. in my race* 
 
 Damascus; but we cannot suppose that his 
 knowledge of the gospel was completed at 
 once. Says Ellicott: '" It is a subject of con- 
 tinual discussion whether the teaching of St. 
 Paul was the result of one single illumination, 
 or of progressive development. . . . The most 
 natural opinion would certainly seem to be 
 111 is: that as, on the one hand, we may rever- 
 ently presume that all the fundamental truths 
 of the gospel would be fully revealed to St. 
 Paul before he commenced preaching, so, on 
 the other hand, it miglit have been ordained, 
 that (in accordance with the laws of our spir- 
 itual nature) its deepest mysteries and pro- 
 foundest harmonies should be seen and felt 
 through the practical experiences of his apos- 
 tolical labors." One cannot avoid conjectur- 
 ing that during the first three years of his 
 conversion a great part of the truth which he 
 was to preach as the only gospel was revealed 
 to him with divine clearness and evidence. 
 
 13-2 : 14. Proof that He did Not Re- 
 ceive THE Gospel from Man. 
 
 13. For ye have heard of my conversa- 
 tion in time past, etc. Compare Revised 
 Version above. Probably from his own lips 
 when he preached the gospel to them. " The 
 history of his past career as a persecutor 
 formed part of his preaching. See Acts 22: 
 2-21; 20 : 4-23; 1 Cor. 15 : 8-10." (Lightfoot.) 
 So remarkable had been his spiritual life that 
 a sketch of it would in many c.ises be not only 
 appropriate, but almost neces-arj\ In the 
 Jews' religion— literally, in Judaism — means 
 while he still observed the Jewish rites, and 
 trusted in obedience to the Mosaic law for 
 salvation. In the Jewish religion is perhaps 
 the best translation. How that beyond 
 measure I persecuted the church of God, 
 and wasted (or, made havoc of) it. ' The 
 church ' may here signify, it is said, the Chris- 
 tian brotherhood, when-ver they might be; 
 but it may signify as well the first organized 
 society of Christians, located at Jerusalem. 
 To 1)6 sure, these were scattered abroad by the 
 persecution that broke out after the stoning of 
 
 Stephen (Actss: i), and some of them doubtless 
 went as far as Damascus, preaching the word 
 there, and probably making disciples; but as 
 yet there was but one church. By calling it 
 'the church of God,' Paul shows how sacred 
 an institution he now felt it to be, and how 
 deep was his compunction for attempting to 
 lay it waste. Not that he speaks of his effort 
 as a wholly futile atteinpt; he means rather 
 to say that he was engaged for a time in perse- 
 cuting and devastating it. This is the most 
 obvious explanation of the, tense of the Greek 
 verbs. Many were put to death; many were 
 
 imprisoned. (Aci* 8:3; 9 : l, 2; 26 : lO; 1 Cor. 15:9.) 
 
 And the apostle mentions this to prove that he 
 could not have received the gospel from men 
 before his conversion, since he was at that 
 time a fierce persecutor of the church. 
 
 14. And (that I) profited {advcmced) in the 
 Jews' religion above many, my equals in 
 my own nation. "And went forward in 
 Judaism beyond many companions of the 
 same age." (Hackett.) 'My equals' means 
 'of my own age.' He outstripped the Jewish 
 young men of his years in knowledge of the 
 law, and in zeal for its observance. Writing 
 to the Philippians concerning this part of his 
 life, he describes himself as one who was, "as 
 touching the law, a Pharisee ; as touching 
 zeal, persecuting the church ; as touching the 
 righteousness which is in the law, blameless." 
 (3 : 5, 6.) Paul must then have been a very 
 scrupulous as well as zealous Pharisee, a pro- 
 nounced ritualist, and a conspicuous adversary 
 of the new sect that was rising in Jerusalem. 
 Being more exceedingly zealous of (for) 
 the traditions of my fathers. This clause 
 points out the sphere in which he excelled 
 many of his own age. The adverb (7rep«r<7o- 
 T«><uj) retains its comparative sense, 'more ex- 
 ceedingly.' He was far more of a zealot than 
 many of his coevals for the traditions handed 
 down by the rabbins from the fathers; he fol- 
 lowed them, upheld thein, asserted them with 
 almost fonatical earnestness. Compare Matt. 
 5 : 21 ; 15 : 2; Mark 7 : 3. They were prob- 
 
20 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. I. 
 
 15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from 
 luy mutlKTs womb, and called me by his grace, 
 
 Iti To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him 
 among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with 
 Hesh and biood : 
 
 15 for the traditions of my fathers. But when it was 
 the good pleasure of God, who separated lue, even 
 from my mother's womb, and callt-d me through 
 
 16 his grace, to reveal his Son in me, tlial I might 
 preach him among the Gentiles; immediately I 
 
 ably as sacred to him as the law of Moses; to 
 some they appear to have been more sacred. 
 So then it was certain that he had not been 
 taught the Christian religion by any man be- 
 fore his conversion, and he now proceeds to 
 giiow that he could not have been taught it in 
 that way after his conversion. Says Liglit- 
 foot: "Then came my conversion. It was the 
 work of God's grace. It was foreordained 
 before I had any separate e.vistence. It was 
 not therefore due to any merits of my own ; it 
 did not spring from any principles of my own. 
 The revelation of his Son in me, the call to 
 preach to the Gentiles, were acts of his good 
 pleasure. Thus converted, I took no counsel 
 of human advisers. I did not betake myself 
 to the elder apostles, as I might naturally 
 have done. I secluded myself in Arabia, and 
 when I emerged from my retirement, instead 
 of going to Jerusalem, I returned to Damas- 
 cus. ' ' 
 
 15, 16. But when it pleased God, who 
 separated me, etc. The moaning of the 
 original would be more exactly represented 
 l)y the following translation: But when he 
 that set me apart from my m,other' s womb, 
 and called me through his grace, was pleased 
 to reveal his Son in me, that I m,ight preach 
 him among the Gentiles, etc. 'Set me apart' 
 — that is, assigned or devoted me to a special 
 work, even the preaching of Christ to the 
 Gentiles. Compare Kom. 1 : 1 and Acts 13 : 2. 
 The word 'separated' in the Common and 
 the Revised "Versions is ambiguous. Paul 
 represents himself as singled out and set apart 
 by the will of God from his very birth to the 
 apostleship. And the next clause, 'called me 
 by his grace,' directs attention to another act 
 of God — namely, the divine agency in his con- 
 version. The same verb is used in Rom. 8 : 
 30: "And whom he foreordained, them he 
 also called." This divine calling compre- 
 hends all that God does to awaken the mf)ral 
 nature of a sinner and bring hitn to repent- 
 ance. In Paul's case it was the supernatural 
 pffulgonce and the voice of Christ, together 
 with the work of the Holy Spirit in, his .soul, 
 which had so powerful an effect on his moral 
 
 nature, and led him so quickly' into the new 
 life. The change of that moment was radical, 
 permanent, and wholly of grace. "Observe," 
 says Lightfoot, "how words are accumulated 
 to tell upon the one point on which he is in- 
 sisting — the sole agency of God as distinct 
 from his own efforts." 'To reveal his Son in 
 me' — that is, within me, in my spirit or con- 
 sciousness, so that I for the first time perceived 
 his true character and work. This prepares 
 one for the next clause far better than does the 
 explanation 'through me,' which is favored 
 by Lightfoot and others, appealing to ver. 24 
 and 1 Tim. 1 : 16. Besides, there is great 
 weight in Ellicott's view, that wherever the 
 primary meaning [of the preposition iv\ gives 
 a sense which cannot be objected to dogmati- 
 cally or exegeticall}-, we are bound to abide 
 by it. Both subjectively, by deep inward rev- 
 elations, as well as objectively, by outward 
 manifestations, was the great tipostle prepared 
 for the work of the ministry." 
 
 That I might preach him among the 
 heathen (or. Gentiles'). It was God's good 
 pleasure to reveal his Son in the heart of 
 Paul, in order that Paul might preach him 
 among the Gentiles. Are we then authorized 
 by this lan.guage to say that one of the reasons 
 why God's grace was imparted to Paul was 
 the extraordinary service, which, when con- 
 verted, he would be qualified and employed 
 to render in preaching to the Gentiles? It is 
 an interesting and far-reaching question which 
 we thus propose to the reader, without giving 
 a categorical answer to it ourselves. Im- 
 mediately I conferred not with flesh and 
 blood. The adverb 'immediately,' or, 
 straightvmy appears to modify, not only this 
 statement, but also the two following state- 
 ments. He first declares what lie did not do, 
 and then what he did do, directly after his con- 
 version. Of course, the adverb is not to be so 
 urged as to make it contradict the account of 
 Luke, that Paul abode three days in Damas- 
 cus before his sight was restored. Its use in 
 other parts of the New Testament forbids so 
 narrow an interpretation. See 3 John 14. Like 
 many other words, it is more or less affected by 
 
Ch. I.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 21 
 
 17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which 
 were apostles before tiie; but 1 went iuto Arabia, aud 
 returned again uuto Dauia^cuij. 
 
 IS Theu after three years 1 went up to Jerusalem to 
 see Peter, aud abode with liiui lifteeu days. 
 
 17 conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went 
 I up to Jerusalem to them wiio were apostles belore 
 me: but 1 went away iuto Arabia; and agaiu I 
 returned unto Damascus. 
 
 18 Theu alter three years I went up to Jerusalem 
 1 to visit Cephas, aud 'tarried with him fifteeu days. 
 
 1 Or, become acquainted with. 
 
 the context.' For the meaning of ' flesh and 
 blood' compare Matt. 16:17: "Flesh and 
 blood did not reveal it unto thee." The phrase 
 appears to be equivalent to weak human 
 nature, viewed probably in contrast with the 
 divine source from which Paul hud received 
 his gospel. 
 
 17. Neither went I up to Jerusalem to 
 them which were apostles before me. 
 Tiiere is some uncertainty about the text in 
 this clause. The Revised Version, Westcott 
 and Hort, and Tischendorf, Eighth Edition, 
 have 'went up' (avfiMov) while Ellicott says 
 that this reading "seems obviously, a cor- 
 rection, and is rejected by all the best edi- 
 tors." (1859.) Bathe would not write thus 
 at the present time.* By 'those who were 
 apostles before me ' Paul means the Twelve, 
 or as many of them as were then at Jerusa- 
 lem. As to James, the Lord's brother, noth- 
 ing need be said at this point. His position 
 will be noticed in explaining ver. 19. But I 
 Avent {away) into Arabia. It has been com- 
 monly supposed that Paul went into some 
 part of Arabia not far from Damascus. But 
 this is by no means certain, and the opinion 
 that he visited the region about Sinai is stren- 
 uously defended by Ligiitfoot and others. See 
 his general note on "St. Paul's sojourn in Ara- 
 bia." Whether he went into Artibia for the 
 purpose of preaching the gospel, or for the 
 purpose of preparing himself to do this work 
 more effectually, after a period of solitary 
 communion with God, no one can say. In 
 either case he was doubtless guided by the 
 Spirit of Christ to do as he did ; and in either 
 
 case he was unable during this period to re- 
 ceive instruction from men. As to the length 
 of time passed in Arabia nothing is said. It 
 could not have been more than three years 
 (see ver. 18), and probably was not less than 
 two. Compare the account i n Acts 9 : '20-*23. 
 In his brief sketch of Paul's life, Luke had no 
 occasion to speak of this sojourn in Arabia. 
 And returned again unto Damascus. The 
 little word 'again' connects his conversion 
 with Damascus, though nothing is said of that 
 city in th6 previous verses. But we know 
 from the Acts that Paul was in that city dur- 
 ing three days directly after Christ's appear- 
 ing to him in the way, and the word ' again ' 
 here implies that he left Damascus to go into 
 Arabia. The two records, therefore, comple- 
 ment and confirm each other, yet without af- 
 fording the slightest evidence of any intention 
 to do this. 
 
 18. Then, after three years, I went up 
 to Jerusalem. The date from which he 
 reckons the ' three years' must be the time of 
 conversion, not the time of his return to Da- 
 mascus. For the former was the great epoch 
 of his life, while his return to Damascus was 
 a comparatively unimportant event. Besides, 
 it would be difficult to make out any reason- 
 able chronology of the apostle's life if his first 
 visit to Jerusalem took place six years after 
 his conversion. With this view most inter- 
 preters agree— for example, Winer, Fritzsche, 
 Riickert, Usteri, Olshausen, DeWette, Hil- 
 genfeld, Ewald, Wieseler, Hofmann, Meyer, 
 Sieffert, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Hackett, Cony- 
 beare and Howson, and others. This is the 
 
 1 The compound Greek word translated ' conferred' is 
 worthy of particular notiee, though well explained in 
 Thayer's Lexicon. irpo<r-ava-Ti0r)n.i.. 1. To lay up in 
 addition. 2. Middle, (a) To lay upon one's self in addi- 
 tion ; to uid^jlake besides, (b) With a dative of the per- 
 son to put one's self u/>on another by going lo him — i. e., to 
 commil or betake one's self to another, for the purpose of 
 consulting him, hence to coniu//, to /ate 0H« into counsel 
 (.Authorized Version, to confer with). 
 
 2 In support of a.vj)K0ov Tischendorf (Eighth Ed.) ap- 
 peals to K A K L P with the Peschito and the Coptic, 
 
 the Armenian and the Ethiopic, while in support of 
 ini,\9ov he appeals to B I> E F G, the Sy riac, etc. The 
 documents for one are therefore nearly equal to those 
 f'^)r the other, and the probabilities of change from one 
 to the other by transcribers are indecisive. For a tran- 
 scriber might unintentionally have written a.i>fi\6ov 
 instead of an-^ASof because the former was so often 
 used of going to Jerusalem, or he might have written 
 airrtKOov instead of iivr]K9ov because his eye fell at the 
 moment on the former verb in the next clause. 
 
22 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. I. 
 
 19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save Jauies 
 the Lord's brother. 
 
 20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, 
 before God, I lie not. 
 
 21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and 
 Cilicia: 
 
 19 But other of the apostles saw I none, i save James 
 
 20 the Lord's brother. Now touching the things 
 wliich I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie 
 
 21 not. Then I came into the regions of isyria and 
 
 1 Or, but only. 
 
 first journej' of Paul to Jerusalem, narrated 
 by Luke in Acts 9 : 26. 
 
 To see (or, visit) Peter. More exactly, 
 to become acquainted with Cephas. Evidently, 
 Cephas or Peter was a very prominent apostle 
 in Jerusalem at that time. According to the 
 Acts he was the principal figure among the 
 apostles — bold, outspoken, enterprising, a nat- 
 ural leader of men, and so occupying tiie posi- 
 tion which he was qualified to fill. Hence, 
 although Paul was already established in the 
 Christian faith and abundantly able to preach 
 the gospel, it was perfectly natural for him to 
 desire the acquaintance of Peter, and of any 
 other apostles who might then be in the holy 
 city. And abode (tarried) with him fifteen 
 days. Too short a period for any very 
 thorough study of Christian truth under the 
 tuition of Peter. Paul considers this self-evi- 
 dent. The Galatians could not possibly be- 
 lieve that such knowledge as he possessed of 
 the way of life through Christ had been 
 gained in a fortnight from any human teacher. 
 Besides, as we learn from the narrative of 
 Luke, Paul was "going in and going out at 
 Jerusalem," during those fifteen days, 
 " preaching boldly in the nante of the Lord : 
 and he spake and disputed against the Grecian 
 Jews; but they went about to kill him." 
 (Acta 9: 28.) Paul did not deem it necessary to 
 say all this: it wasenough to remind his read- 
 ers of his purpose in going up to Jerusalem, 
 and of the short time which he spent in that 
 city. 
 
 19. But other of the apostles saw I 
 none, save James the Lord's brother. 
 The SeifFert-Meyer Commentary says : "Thus 
 this James is distinguished from the circle of 
 the Twelve, to which Peter belonged; but is, 
 
 nevertheless, numbered with the apostles in 
 the wider sense. Compare 1 Cor. 15 : 5. This 
 explains the supplementary mention of his 
 name. 'James the Lord's brother' was not 
 James, son of Alpheus, as many have sup- 
 posed, but a natural brother of Jesus (nait. 
 13:35; Maik6:3)j a son of Mary, James the Just 
 (Hegesippus in Eusebius 2 : 23), from birth a 
 Nazarite, who only believed after the resur- 
 rection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:7; Acts! : 14), but ob- 
 tained very high apostolic esteem among the 
 Jewish Christians (•■i:9), and became the hon- 
 ored bishop of the church at Jerusalem." 
 This view is upheld by a majority of mod- 
 ern scholars; for example, by Olshausen, 
 De Wette, Hilgenfeld, Wieseler, Lightfoot, 
 Meyer and Sieffert.* 
 
 20. Now the things Avhich I Avrite unto 
 you, behold, before God, I lie not. A 
 solemn asseveration of the truth of what he 
 has just written as to the purpose and result of 
 his visit to Jerusalem, as far as they had any 
 bearing upon the source of his knowledge of 
 the gospel. He evidently makes this solemn 
 appeal to God for the truth of his words, be- 
 cause his readers could have no other evidence 
 as to the time which he then spent in Jeru- 
 salem, or as to the purpose which led him to 
 go there. It looks as if he was aware that 
 the Judaizers in Galatia had represented him 
 as having received the gospel, at second hand, 
 from Peter and other apostles, and that it was 
 desirable for him to show the utter falsity of 
 their representation. The Greek construction 
 may be represented by the following version : 
 " Now as to what I am writing to 3'ou, before 
 God I declare that I lie not." (Ellicott.) 
 Compare 2 Tim. 2 : 14; 4:1. 
 
 21. Afterwards I came into the regions 
 
 '"Are we to translate 'I saw no other apostle save 
 James,' or, ' I saw no other apostle, but only .Tames ' ? It 
 will be seen that the question is not whether ei ^j» 
 ('save'), retains its exceptive force or not, for this it 
 seems always to do, but whether the exception refers to 
 the whole clause or to the verb alone. That the latter 
 is quite a possible construction will appear from Matt, 
 12:4; Luke 4 : 26,27; Gal. 2 : 16; Rev. 21 : 27. But, on 
 
 the other hand, the sense of ct«(bov ('other') naturally 
 links it with fi JTjj ('save'), from which it cannot be 
 separated without harshness, and €Tfpo»- ('other ') car- 
 ries T<i»' ojroirTdAuy (' the apastles') with it. It seems, 
 then, that James is here called an apostle, though it 
 does not, therefore, follow that he was one of the 
 twelve." (Lightfoot.) Se« Thayer's " Lexicon," under 
 <i Mi, III, c.8,/3. 
 
Ch. I] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 23 
 
 22 Aud was unknown by face unto the churches of 
 Judea which were in Christ: 
 
 2:{ Uut ihey had heard only, That he which persecuted 
 us in times past now preacheth the faith which ouce 
 he destroyed. 
 
 24 And ihey glorified God in me. 
 
 22 Cilicia. And I was still unknown by face unto the 
 
 23 churches of Judea wiiich were in Christ: but ility 
 only heard say, He that once perstcuied us now 
 preacheth the laitli of which he ouce made havock; 
 
 24 and they glorified (jod in me. 
 
 of Syria and Cilicia. According to Acts 
 9 : 30, Paul appears to have sailed from Ce- 
 saroa to Tarsus in Cilicia, from which place 
 he passed into Syria, preaching in the two 
 provinces four or five years. See Hackett on 
 Acts 9 : 30. His object in this passage is 
 simply to direct attention to the regions where 
 he preached as remote from Jeriisalem, where 
 the apostles then were ; and he therefore men- 
 tions the provinces m the order of their im- 
 portance. "Cilicia,'" says Ewald, " was con- 
 stantly little better than an appendage of 
 Syria." " It is also to be noticed that these 
 two countries are always named in that order 
 (see Acts 15 : 23, 41), and that order agrees 
 with the land route from Jerusalem to Cilicia, 
 which was the one more commonly taken. 
 Hence, Paul may have adhered to that order 
 in Gal. 1 : 21 from the force of association, 
 though in this instance he went first to Cilicia, 
 and from there made missionary excursions 
 into Syria." (Hackett on Acts 9 : 30.) It 
 should be added that Paul may have preached 
 at this time more extensively in Syria than in 
 Cilicia, and that in recalling this period of his 
 ministry, the former province, on that account, 
 tnok precedence in his mind of the latter. 
 Thus there is no reason to suppose any contra- 
 diction between this passage and the account 
 given by Luke. The difference between the 
 two rather establishes our confidence in both, 
 when properly interpreted, for it demonstrates 
 their independence. 
 
 22. And was unknown by face unto 
 the churches of Judea which were in 
 Christ. By 'the churches of Judea' must 
 be meant the churches of the province, out- 
 side of Jerusalem. For the apostle has before 
 spoken of his brief sojourn in that city, and 
 Luke describes, in a few powerful words, his 
 public efforts there. Many of the churches in 
 Jerusalem had, therefore, seen his face and 
 heard his voice. But this was not the case 
 with the churches of the province generally. 
 *By face,' or, in respect to face— that is, per- 
 
 sonal appearance, though he was known to 
 tliem by report, as the next verse clearly 
 states, and as might be safely inferred from 
 the nature of the case. Note the plural — 
 there were churches of Judea. 
 
 23. But they had heard only— or. But 
 they were only hearing. This was a report 
 which, during those years of the apostle's life 
 of which so little is recorded, they were hear- 
 ing again and again. He which {that) per- 
 secuted us in times past— that is, ' was our 
 persecutor, known as such, distinguished as 
 such beyond others.' Now preacheth the 
 faith which once he destroyed. To ' preach 
 faith' maybe ti preach the duty or import- 
 ance or nature of subjective faith in Christ; 
 but to 'preach the faith' is to preach the gos- 
 pel, regarded as a message of which faith in 
 Christ is the central and distinctive truth. 
 Hackett explains the expression in Acts 6 : 7 
 as meaning "the faith-system- that is, the 
 gospel"; and Lightfoot remarks, "It is a 
 striking proof of the large space occupied by 
 ' faith ' in the mind of the infant church, that 
 it should so soon have pasi^ed into a synonj'm 
 of the gospel. See Acts 6 : 7." Compare, 
 also, Jude 3. This appears to be the more 
 obvious and correct view, though many deny 
 that the word faith is used in the New Testa- 
 ment of anything but the subjective act. 
 Certainly Paul preached the doctrine of faith 
 in Christ; and it was those who received this 
 doctrine and believed in Christ whom he per- 
 secuted and wasted. So 'the faith' here rep- 
 resents, first, the gospel, and, secondly, those 
 who received it. The core, the heart of both, 
 was faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 24. And they glorified God in me— that 
 is, they found in me occasion to praise God. 
 "He does not say that they marveled at me, 
 they praised me, they were struck with admir- 
 ation, but he attributes all to grace. 'They 
 glorified God,' he says, 'in me.'" (Chrysoa- 
 tom.) 
 
24 
 
 GALATIAN3. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 CHAPTEK II. 
 
 THEN fourteen years after I went up again to Jeru- 
 salem with Baruabas, aud took Titus with me also. 
 
 1 Then after the space of fourteen years I went 
 up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, lakiiig Titus 
 
 Ch. 2 : "Again, he claims that the same 
 thing — [tliat his knowledge of the gospel is not 
 of human but of divine origin] — is proved 
 affirmatively by the fact that, on his coming 
 at a later period into fuller connection with 
 the apostles, his views of truth were sanctioned 
 by them, as perfectly coincident with their 
 own, though they had been taught personally 
 by our Lord (.i:i-6); that he was recognized 
 by them as standing ia all respects, officially, 
 on a level with themselves (2:7-10); and that, 
 so far from having acted at any time in subor- 
 dination to them, or having acknowledged 
 any dependence on them, he had in one in- 
 stance opposed his own authority to that of 
 one of the most eminent among them. (2 : 11-13.) 
 In the controversy at Antioch, he had not 
 shrunk from reproving Peter himself publicly 
 and to his face for having practically aban- 
 doned the great principle of justification by 
 faith alone, inasmuch as he had timidly con- 
 cealed for a time his real convictions, and acted 
 as if Jewish rites must be superadded to faith 
 in Christ as essential to salvation. (2:14-21.)" 
 (Hackett.) 
 
 1-10. Paul's Gospel and Apostleship 
 Kecognized by James, Peter, and John 
 AT a Convention in Jerusalem, wherein 
 THE Duty OF Believing Gentiles toward 
 THE Jewish Law avas Considered. 
 
 1. Then fourteen years after (or, after 
 the space of fourteen years'^) I went up again 
 to Jerusalem with Barnabas, etc. With 
 which of the apostle's visits to Jerusalem, 
 mentioned by Luke in the Acts, can this be 
 identified? See Acts 9 : 26; 11 : 30; 15 : 1, 
 seq.; 18: 22; 21 : 15. Obviously with the third, 
 if similarit3' of purpose is any guide to the 
 truth. For this is the only one of the five, 
 except the last, which Luke describes as hav- 
 ing to do with questions allied to those men- 
 tioned by Paul in the first part of this chapter, 
 and this Epistle was certainly written before 
 his last visit to Jerusalem. His first and last 
 visits may therefore be left out of the question, 
 and our inquiry restricted to the second, third, 
 and fourth. All that Luke says of the second 
 
 visit is comprised in two verses: "And the 
 disciples [at Antioch], every man according 
 to his ability, determined to send relief unto 
 the brethren that dwelt in Judea; which also 
 they did, sending it to the elders by the hand 
 of Barnabas and Paul." There is nothing in 
 this which suggests, even remotely, such trans- 
 actions as the apostle describes in the passage 
 before us. Still more briefly does Luke notice 
 the fourth visit of Paul: "And when they 
 had landed at Cesarea, he [Paul] went up and 
 saluted the church [at Jerusalem], and went 
 down to Antioch.'' 
 
 But it may be said that the account of Luke 
 in the fifteenth chapterof the Acts differs very 
 greatly from the account here given by Paul. 
 This is true, yet the two accounts relate to the 
 same general subject, and may without diflS- 
 culty be seen to complement each other. 
 Luke's account is that of a historian desiring 
 to present a sketch of the proceedings in so far 
 as tliey aflected all the churches; Paul's 
 account is that of a man who desires to estab- 
 lish a single point, namely, that his teaching 
 and authority were admitted to be Christian 
 and apostolic by the greatest of the Twelve; 
 Studied in this light, the two accounts will be 
 seen to belong together. 
 
 But from what event is the period of ' four- 
 teen years' reckoned? Obviously, from his 
 going up to Jerusalem to make the acquaint- 
 ance of Peter, as previously described. (1 :i8.) 
 This ter'Tninus a quo is suggested by the 
 word 'again,' and must be accepted as the one 
 in Paul's mind, unless there are insuperable 
 objections to it. The weightiest objections are 
 chronological, but they do not appear to be 
 decisive. Says Lightfoot: "As the latter visit 
 is calculated independently to have taken 
 place a. d. 51, the date of the first visit will 
 according to this view be thrown back to 
 about A. D. 38, and that of the conversion to 
 about A. D. 36, the Jewish mode of reckon- 
 ing being adopted." This seems to us a more 
 natural interpretation than to suppose that 
 Paul meant fourteen years after his conver- 
 sion. Compare Ellicott on the passage, with 
 
 1 Compare Mark 2:1; Acts 24 : 17. 
 
Ch. II.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 25 
 
 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated 
 untu tlieiu that gospel wliicn 1 preucli among the Gen- 
 tiles, but privately to llieiii which were of reputation, 
 lest by any niean.s I should run, or had run, in vain. 
 
 2 also with me. And I went up by revelation; and I 
 laid before them tlie gospel which I preach among 
 the Gentiles, but privately before them who ' were 
 of repute, lest by any means I should be running, 
 
 Cony beare and Howson, chapter vii. 'With 
 Barnabas' agrees with Luke's narrative in 
 Acts 15: 2, which represents Paul and Barna- 
 bas as sent by the church at Antioch to the 
 apostles and elders at Jerusalem because of 
 dissensions in resjtect to the necessity of cir- 
 cumcision to Siilvation. From that nsirrative 
 it appears that "certain other" members of 
 the church were sent in company with Paul 
 ami Barnabas. 
 
 And took Titus with me also. The form 
 of expression here employed niai<es Paul him- 
 self the leading person in this company, for in 
 some sense lie took with him Barnabas and 
 Titus also. The latter niaj' have been in- 
 cluded in Luke's " certain other " brethren, 
 though Paul appears to have wished him to 
 go, perhiips as a representative of heathen 
 converts to the truth. For other notices of 
 him, see 2 Cor. 2 : 13; 7: 6, 13, seq. ; 8:6, 16, 
 23; 12 : 18; 2 Tim. 4 : 10; Titus 1 : 4. 
 
 2. And I went up by revelation — that is, 
 ill accordance with 'revelation,' or, perhaps, 
 with !i revelation. This revelation may have 
 preceded and occasioned the action of the 
 churcli, or it may have followed thiit action, 
 assuring Paul of his duty to go up to Jerusa- 
 lem for the purpose contemplated. In either 
 ca.<e it was natural for the historian Luke to 
 relate the action of the brethren in respect to 
 Paul's visit to Jerusaletn, and equally natural 
 for Paul to speak in this letter of the special 
 revelation by which he was moved to do the 
 same thing. And communicated unto 
 them that gospel which I preach among 
 the Gentiles. Paul made to ' them ' — that is, 
 to the Christians at Jerusalem — a careful state- 
 ment of the gospel which he was preaching 
 among the Gentiles. This was a wise proceed- 
 ing, for he had reason to fear that it liad been 
 more or less misrepresented by his detractors. 
 But privately to them which (w/io) were 
 of reputation. This is not to be understood 
 as explaining the previous clause, and deny- 
 ing thiit tliere was any ptiblic conference for 
 the saiTie purpose, liut as cttl ling attention to 
 certain priviite meetings with the leaders of 
 the church, bj' which their influence in favor 
 
 of Chri.stian truth and freedom might be 
 gained lor the public conference. "The pri- 
 vate consultation was a wise precaution to 
 avoid misunderstanding: the public confer- 
 ence was a matter of necessity to obtain re- 
 cognition of the freedom of the Gentile 
 churches." (Lightfoot.) Compare Acts 15: 
 4, 6, 12, 2'2. Lest by any means I should 
 run — (literally be running), or had run in 
 vain — that is, 'in vain' so far as concerned 
 establishing the freedom of the Gentile Chris- 
 tians from the law of Moses, without a breach 
 with the' Jewish Christians. For however 
 true and divine his doctrine might be, if it was 
 not understood and accepted by such men as 
 James, Peter, and John, who were pillars of 
 the church at Jerusalem, his work in the 
 present and in the past would be to a great 
 extent neutralized. Says Pfleiderer: " AVe 
 may imagine in what a painful situation the 
 iipostle . . . found himself If the party 
 zealous for the Law siiould be successful with 
 their demand that the believing Gentiles must 
 by circumcision stii>mit to the Jewish Law, 
 and if it should be confirmed that in this de- 
 mand they really had the parent church, to- 
 gether with the apostles on their side, the mis- 
 sion to the Gentiles was at an end, and the life- 
 work of the apostle to the heathen was hope- 
 less. ... If Paul had, on the other hand, 
 simply ignored the demands of the Judaizers, 
 without coming to any understanding with the 
 earlier apostles and obtaining their sanction 
 of his Gentile mission, with its freedom from 
 the Law, he would have severed the connec- 
 tion of his heathen churches with the ])arent 
 church, and the Gentile church, thus isolated 
 from the very first and degraded to a sect, 
 would hardly have been able long to maintain 
 its existence. The continuance or the destruc- 
 tion of his life work depended therefore now, 
 to Pauls mind, on whether he succeeded in 
 obtaining from the parent church and its lead- 
 ers the acknowledgment of their Christian 
 fellowship for his Gentile Christians as such." 
 ("The infltience of the Apostle Paul on 
 Christianity," p. 85.) The clause before us is 
 a very diflUcult one to interpret. Ellicott gives- 
 
26 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, 
 was compelled to be circumcised : 
 
 4 And that because of false brethren unawares 
 brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty 
 
 3 or had run, in vain. But not even Titus who was 
 with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be cir- 
 
 4 cuiucised: 'and that because of the false brethren 
 privily brought in, who cume in privily to spy out 
 
 I Or, but it was 6 
 
 <•/• 
 
 the following version: " Lest by any means 
 I might be running, or have run, in vain." 
 The verb 'run' represents Paul's apostolic 
 ministry under the figure of a race. His worlt 
 was performed as eagerly, and strenuously as 
 the running of an athlete in the race course, 
 and at this time he was not without apprehen- 
 sion of losing the prize for which he had 
 striven. Unless he could gain the support of 
 James, Peter, and John, with most of the 
 church at Jerusalem, there was no human 
 prospect of maintaining the liberty of the 
 Gentile churclies, without breaking wholly 
 with the converts from Judaism. Hence his 
 private interviews with these men, as well as 
 his public explanation of the gospel which ho 
 preached. Tlie verb 'run' is here used first 
 in the present subjunctive, and in the aorist 
 indicative. Compare 1 The?s. 3 : 5. "In the 
 second clause the change of mood from the 
 subjunctive (rpixw) to the indicative (eSpai±ov) 
 is rendered necessary by the change of tense, 
 since the consequences of the past were no 
 longer contingent but inevitable. " (Light- 
 foot.) 
 
 3. But neither (not even) Titus, who 
 Avas with me, being a Greek, was com- 
 pelled to be circumcised. The phrase 
 'being a Greek' is to be understood as conces- 
 sive; 'who was with me, although he was a 
 Greek,' and therefore of course uncircum- 
 cised. The language of this sentence, espe- 
 cially when taken with what follows, plainly 
 implies that his circumcision was insisted 
 upon so strongly that refusal was difficult. 
 Nor is this surprising. For the question to be 
 practically settled at this time was deemed of 
 vital importance by the Judaistic party as well 
 as by Paul and Barnabas. ■ Titus, an uncir- 
 cumcised Greek, was there associated with 
 Paul, and nothing could seem more indispens- 
 able to the Judaistic spirit than his circum- 
 cision. To see him there as a Greek was like 
 Haman's seeing Mordecai at the king's gate. 
 On the other hand, it was impossible for Paul 
 to consent to his circumcision, even for the 
 sake of peace, for it would be surrendering in 
 a crucial instance the very principle fOr which 
 
 he was contending; namely, that Gentile sin- 
 ners could be saved through faith in Christ 
 without submitting to the Mosaic law. There 
 is no evidence in this passage, however, or in 
 the narrative of Luke in the Acts, that any of 
 the apostles sympathized with those who de- 
 manded the circumcision of Titus, though it 
 is perhaps conceivable that they may have 
 advised him to yield the point for the sake of 
 peace. Yet we discover no hint of even this, 
 and the later weakness of Peter must not be 
 allowed to cast any shadow upon his action at 
 Jerusalem. In the narrative of Luke he ap- 
 pears as the consistent advocate of admitting 
 Gentiles to Christian fellowship upon their 
 acceptance of Christ. 
 
 4. And that, because of the false breth- 
 ren unawares (pjHvily) brought in. This 
 difficult verse is best explained by regarding it 
 as a continuation of the preceding sentence, 
 from which it should be separated by a comma 
 only. Some interpreters hold that it was 
 added in order to show- why the pressure to 
 have Titus circumcised was ineifectual. That 
 pressure was occasioned by the presence of 
 certain false brethren, who were more Jewish 
 than Christian, and whose aim and spirit were 
 thoroughly hostile to the principles which 
 Paul was there to sustain. And Paul's lan- 
 guage is thought to imply that he might have 
 consented to the circumcision of Titus, if it 
 had been called for by the scruples of 'the 
 weaker brethren,' instead of the bigotry of 
 false brethren. But is this at all probable? 
 Can we suppose that, after what had occurred 
 at Antioch (Actsisri, seq), Paul would have 
 consented to pacify weak consciences hy the 
 circumcision of Titus? Or that in this Epistle 
 to the Galatians he would have intimated the 
 possibility of such consent? The circum- 
 stances of his visit to Jerusalem and of his 
 writing this letter alike forbid the thought. 
 It seems better, therefore, to suppose that the 
 apostle added these words to point out the 
 occasion of this unsuccessful attempt to secure 
 the circumcision of Gentiles — the occasion of 
 this entire transaction, especially as it was 
 illustrated in the case of Titus. Not even 
 
Ch. II.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 27 
 
 wliicb we have ia Christ Jesus, that they might bring 
 us into bondage : 
 
 our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that 
 
 Titus, who was present with me (to say noth- 
 ing of otiicrs less conspicuous, or of the Gen- 
 tilfs in general), was compelled by the voice 
 of tlie church to be circumcised, and that on 
 account of the false brethren, etc. The whole 
 controversy, he means to say, was occasioned 
 by these brethren. It was a desire to satisfy 
 tlieni which led to. the proposal to circumcise 
 Titus. It was their character and aim which 
 led Paul and Barnabas to withstand them in 
 Antioch and later in Jerusalem. And it was 
 precisely these, their spirit and aim, which 
 weakened their influence in the churcii, and 
 rendered it possible, humanly speaking, for 
 tlie friends of Christian liberty to prevail. 
 
 The only other ^iew which suits the connec- 
 tion is this, that the conjunction (5e) should be 
 translated ' but,' and the ellipsis be supplied as 
 follows : ' but (this came to pass) on account of 
 the false bretliren surreptitiously introduced.' 
 That is, the entire transaction, embracing the 
 effort to have Titus circumcised, and the re- 
 linquishment of that effort as impracticable or 
 wrong, was occasioned by the presence and 
 influence of the false brethren, etc. It is diffi- 
 cult to decide between this and the preceding 
 interpretation. Either of them is consistent 
 with tlie language and the situation, but nei- 
 ther of them is obvious. The passage is con- 
 fessedly obscure, and scholars have thus far 
 labored in vain to reach a perfectly satisfac- 
 tory interpretation of it. 
 
 "Three ideas," remarks Jowett, "seem to 
 be struggling for expression in these ambigu- 
 ous clauses [ver. 3-5]: (1) Titus was not cir- 
 cumcised; (2) though an attempt was made 
 by the false brethren to compel him; (3) 
 which as a matter of principle we thought it 
 so much the more our duty to resist." "What 
 part was taken in the discussion by the apos- 
 tles of the circumcision? . . . On the whole 
 it seems probable that they recommended St. 
 Paul to yield the point, as a charitable conces- 
 sion to the prejudices of the Jewish converts; 
 
 lOn the use of iva with the future, Light foot says: 
 " It is found several times in the New Testament with 
 the future, and sometimes even with tlie indicative 
 present, as In 4 : 17. This, though not a classical usage, 
 is justified by similar constructions of dirw?, o(t>pa in 
 classical writers." Ellicott is more doubtful, saying: 
 "Although this reading is confirmed by a decided pre- 
 
 but convinced at length by his representations 
 that such a concession, at such a time, would 
 be fatal, they withdrew their counsel, and 
 gave him their support." (Lightloot.) As 
 previously remarked, this conjecture as to the 
 first advice of the apostles has no proper foun- 
 dation in the language of Paul or of Luke, 
 and should not be received with any great 
 confidence. The Greek word (7rap€i<TaxTous) 
 translated 'brought in privily' might be ren- 
 dered 'insidiously brought in.' Possibly it 
 has the active sense, 'wlio have stolen in.' 
 The figure is that of spies, let in or stealing in. 
 If the word is used here in the passive sense, 
 there must have been Ciiristians in the church 
 at Jerusalem, and perhaps elsewhere, who 
 facilitated the entrance of these false brethren, 
 knowing more of their views and spirit than 
 were openly avo-wed. 
 
 Who came iu privily to $py out our lib- 
 erty which we have in Christ Jesus, that 
 they might bring us into bondage. They 
 were Pharisees in disguise, coming into the 
 church to bring it under the law of Moses, as 
 interpreted by Kabbinic tradition, or, as Paul 
 often calls it, the law of works. Their interest 
 was in the law rather than in the gospel, and 
 they crept into the church for the purpo.se of 
 upholding ritualistn and resisting the progress 
 of spiritual freedom, for the purpose of bring- 
 ing the Christians back to Judaism. This 
 finishes the apostle's brief but vigorous char- 
 acterization of the extreme Judaists whom he 
 found in the church at Jerusalem, and we 
 have no reason to pronounce it harsh or un- 
 true in any particular. 
 
 Notice, on the other hand, his view of the 
 Christian's state when united with Christ. It 
 is one of liberty. His service of Christ springs 
 from love and gratitude, not froin fear. He is 
 not under law, as a means of acceptance with 
 God, but under grace. ' Freedom ' is here 
 freedom from obligation to obey the law of 
 Moses as a means of salvation.* 
 
 ponderanee of uncial authority [A B C D E (with X)l, 
 and the improbability of a correction very great, still 
 the instances of iVa with the ftiture are so very few, 
 that we are not justified in saying more than this, that 
 the future appears used to convey the idea of ilurntion, 
 or perhaps, rather, of issue, xfiquencf, more distinctly 
 than the more usual aorist subjuuclive." 
 
28 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for 
 an hour; that the truth of tlie gospel might continue 
 witn you. 
 
 () Hut of those who seemed to be somewhat, whatso- 
 ever they were, it makelh no matter to me; (iod ac- 
 cepteth uo man's person : for they who seemed to be 
 xomew/uil in coufer>;uce added nothing to me: 
 
 5 they might bring us into bondnge; to whom we 
 gave place in the way of s-ubjeeiion, no, not for 
 an hour; that the triitli of the go>pel miglit con- 
 
 6 tinne with you. But from those wlio iwere reputed 
 to be somewhat (-whatsoever they were, it makeih 
 no matter to me: (Jod accepteth not man's person — 
 they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to 
 
 1 Or, are 2 Or, what they once were. 
 
 5. To whom we gave place by subjec- 
 tion, no, not for an hour. A more literal 
 rendering would be : 'To whom we yielded 
 not «ven for an hour by the subjection' de- 
 manded of us.' That the truth of the gos- 
 pel might continue with you. The con- 
 trolling motive in the minds of Paul and Bar- 
 nabas was a desire to have the good news of 
 salvation by grace, without the deeds of the 
 I^aw, remain in their possession as a perma- 
 nent blessing. 
 
 6. But of those who seemed to be 
 somewhat — (»r, as in the Revised Version, 
 But from those who were reputed to be some- 
 what. Here the sentence breaks off, the apos- 
 tle turning aside from the thought which he 
 has begun to express, to make, by way of pa- 
 rentliesis, the remarks of the next two clauses, 
 and then resuming his opening thought in a 
 different construction. If, then, we learn his 
 first thought from the last clause of the verse, 
 he began to say : ' But from those reputed to 
 be somewhat notliing was comtnuiiicated to 
 me,' or ' added to my knowledge of the gos- 
 pel.' Yet he turns away from this thouglit 
 when it is but half expressed to remark con- 
 cerning 'those reputed to be somewhat,' 
 whatsoever they were, it maketh no mat- 
 ter {difference) to me, or, in other words, is 
 a matter of no account to me. Yet another 
 rendering of this clause is possible: "What 
 they formerly were makes no difference with 
 me.'' In this case the word translated ' for- 
 merly ' (iroTe) is an adverb of time, as it is said 
 to be in every other passage of the New Testa- 
 ment where it occurs. If so understood here, 
 Piitil means to say that their former connec- 
 tion with Jesus as his disciples is really of no 
 consequence to him, for God does not grant his 
 favor on account of any outward advantage 
 of one tnati over another. And if so under- 
 stood, the words clearly imply that the assail- 
 ants of Paul's apostolic authority extolled the 
 
 other apostles because they once enjoyed the 
 personal teacliiug of Christ and depreciated 
 Paul because he never had it. God accept- 
 eth no man's (Revised "Version, not man s) 
 person. Tlie latter rendering is equivalent to 
 saying : No outward differences between men 
 affect God's treatment of them. He looks at 
 them as they are and' acce])ts tliem for what 
 they are worth. Wordly distinctions count 
 for nothing with him. The circumstance that 
 James, Peter, and John were acquainted with 
 Jesus and instructed by him, during his 
 earthly life, gives them no advantage in the 
 sight of God over one who had received the 
 same knowledge of Christ b^- revelation. The 
 expression 'to be somewhat' is not in itself 
 depreciatory, though it may be made so by 
 the context. Sieffert imagines that it here be- 
 trays "a certain irritation in respect to his 
 adversaries who would not admit his equality 
 with the original apostles, as if 'the being 
 somewhat' belonged especially to them." And 
 Lightfoot remarks that "the exact shade of 
 meaning which it bears must always be de- 
 termined \>y the context. Here it is depreci- 
 atory, not indeed of the Twelve themselves, 
 but of the extravagant and exclusive claims 
 set up for them by the Judaizers." 
 
 For they who seemed, etc. (or, as Re- 
 vised Version, They, I say, who were of re- 
 pute imparted nothing to me). The order of 
 the Greek words mtikes the pronoun 'me' at 
 the beginning of the phrase emphatic: 'to 
 nie, I say, they who were of repute imparted 
 nothing' — that is, nothing which pertains to 
 the gospel, no knowledge in respect to Christ 
 or the waj' of life which I did not have before. 
 Indeed, the verb probably signifies to make a 
 communication to, and Paul denies thtit they 
 communicated any religious truth to him. It 
 seems, therefore, that his communications to 
 them were so full and clear that they did not 
 make any attempt to instruct him. 
 
 ' T)r Haclcett translates: "To whom we yielded the 
 Biibjeetiiin {f'^^iiiei' rfi vnorayrj), no, not for an hour,' 
 and adds: "Our translators make the rji vnorayy 
 
 almost a tautological repetition of cifa^ec. It is the 
 svhjection demanded in this matter of circumcision 
 which is meant." 
 
Ch. II.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 29 
 
 7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel 
 of the uuciruuiuci.-.ioii was coiuniitted unto me, us l/te 
 gospel of the circ-uiaci.ion icax unto Peter; 
 
 8 (For he tlial wrought etteutually in Peter to the 
 apostleship of the circinucisiou, the same was mighty 
 ill im- toward the Ueuliles; ) 
 
 y And when James, Cephas, and Jolin, who seemed 
 to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given uiilo 
 me, they gave to me and liaruabas the rignl hands of 
 fellowship; that we should yo uuto the heathen, and 
 they unto the circumcision. 
 
 7 lue : but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been 
 intrusted with the gospel of tlie uiicircumcisioii,even 
 
 8 as Peter with the yux^iel of tlie circumcision ^lor he 
 who wiouglit for Peter unto the apostleship oi the 
 circumcisiou wrought for iiic also uiiio the tientiles) ; 
 
 9 and wlien they perceived the grace that was jjivcu 
 unto me, .lames and Cephas and .lohn, they who 
 1 were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and iiariui- 
 bas the right hands of lelluwsnip, thai we should go 
 uuto the Ueutiles, and ihey uniu the circumcisiou; 
 
 It is, perhaps, worthy of notice that the 
 Greelv expression liere used (oi SokoOi'tcs) may 
 signify eitlier 'they wlio were of repute' or 
 ' tlioy who are of repute.' Lightfoot greatly 
 prefers the present tense, thinlving that Paul 
 iuis in mind the reputation enjo^'ed by them 
 among the Jewish Christians at the time when 
 he wrote this letter. For they were now 
 lauded by the men who were aiming to per- 
 vert the gospel among the Galatians as well as 
 honored by the church at Jerusalem. In 
 either case, the meaning of the passage is per- 
 tinent and forcible, and with either translation 
 it agrees with all that is known concerning 
 the history of the earl^' churches. * 
 
 7. But contrariwise, when they saw, 
 etc., the remainder of the verse better, as in 
 tlie Kevised Version, tJiat I had been en- 
 trusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision 
 even as Peter with the gospel of the circum- 
 cisiun. Thus Paul resumes his interrupted 
 tliiiught and states in another form what lie 
 had begun to say in the first clause of the pre- 
 ceding verse; namely, that instead of correct- 
 ing his doctrine, or of imparting to him any 
 new truth, they had seen in his communication 
 to them evidence of his having been commis- 
 sioned to preach the glad tidings to the uncir- 
 cumcised, and evidence as clear as they had of 
 Peter's commission to preach the same glad tid- 
 ings to the circumcised. For the word 'circum- 
 cision' stands for circumcised, the abstract for 
 the concrete, and the word ' tincircumcision ' 
 for uncircumcised, in like manner. 
 
 8. For he that Avrought effectually in 
 Peter to the apostleship of the circum- 
 cision, the same was mighty in me 
 toward the Gentiles. In this parenthetic 
 sentence Paul assigns the reason why his 
 communication was so convincing to those 
 
 who heard it, and why they did not attempt 
 to instruct him in regard to the gospel or 
 concerning his work among the Gentiles. 
 God, who had been with Peter, and had 
 wrought for liim, to make his ministry 
 among the Jews effectual, had wrought as 
 manifestly for Paul, to make effectual his jnis- 
 sion and message to the heathen. Apostolic 
 gifts had been imparted to both in perhaps 
 equal measure. The Greek word employed is 
 suggestive in the first place of spiritual influ- 
 ence, energizing the inward life, increasing 
 faith, zeal, and courage. Indirectly it em- 
 brtices also the outward signs and workings of 
 that faith, everything, indeed, including mint- 
 cles, by which God wrought for the apostles, 
 and made their ministry ettectuul. 
 
 9. And when James, Cephas, and John, 
 who seemed to be pillars, perceived the 
 grace that w^as given unto me. The Avord 
 translated 'saw' in ver. 7, refers, according 
 to Ellicott, "to the mental impression pro- 
 duced, when the nature and success of St. 
 Paul's preaching was brought before them " ; 
 and the word here translated 'perceived' 
 refers to "the result of the actual information 
 they derived from him." Accordingto Light- 
 foot, the former word "describes the appre- 
 hension of the outward tolcens of his commis- 
 sion, as evinced by his successful labors; the 
 latter, tha conviction arrived at in consequence, 
 thsit the grace of God was witli him. See 
 4 : 8, 9." They gave to me and Barnabas 
 the right hands of fellowship. In this verse 
 James outranks Peter, though just before Peter 
 is mtide the representative apostle of the cir- 
 cumcision. The prominence of James in this 
 public expression of fellowship is explained 
 by the fact that he was the pastor of the 
 church at Jerusalem, and seems to have pre- 
 
 ' According to the Revised Version the conjunction | and the best translation of it is ' I say.' See the .irtlcle 
 (yap) which introduces this clause is not causal but ex- in Thayer's New Testament Le.\icou under the word 
 plicative; Boise says: "intensive and explicative "; | yoip. 
 
30 
 
 GALATTANS. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 10 Only Ihey would that we should remember the 
 poor; the same which I alsu was forward to do. 
 
 11 But when Peter wa^ come to Antioch, I withstood 
 him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 
 
 12 For before that certain camefiom James, he did 
 eat with tlie (jentiles: but when they were come, he 
 withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which 
 were of ihe circumcision. 
 
 10 only they would t\id.t we should remember the poor; 
 
 which very thing I was also zealous to do. 
 n But when Cejjhas cauie to Antioch, I resisted 
 12 hiui to the face, because he stood condemned, l-'or 
 before that certain came from James, he did eat 
 with the Gentiles: but when they came, he drew 
 back and separated himself, fearing them that 
 
 sided at the public conferences. He would, 
 therefore, naturally take precedence of Peter 
 and John on this occasion, in the formal recog- 
 nition of Paul as the chief apostle to the 
 Gentiles. It is also noticeable that, in describ- 
 ing this visit to Jerusalem, Paul does not call 
 James 'the brother of the Lord,' as he did in 
 describing his first visit to Jerusalem (i:i9); 
 for James, the brother of John, was no longer 
 alive, and the only James now prominent and 
 lilcely to be thought of by his readers, Wiis the 
 brother of the Lord, known far and wide as 
 tlie bishop at Jerusalem. Such apparently 
 incidental agreement of language with his- 
 torical fact is a striking proof of the authen- 
 ticity of this letter. That we should go 
 unto the heathen {Gentiles), and they 
 unto the circumcision — that is, to the end, 
 with the understanding tiiat, 'we, to the Gen- 
 tiles; and they, to the circumcision.' Whether 
 the full expression would be 'should go,' or 
 'should be apostles,' is not perfectly certain. 
 Of the main thought there can be no doubt. 
 Paul and Barnabas were to give themselves 
 chiefly to work for and among the Gentiles; 
 James and Cephas and John were — at least, 
 for the present — to give themselves to Chris- 
 tian labor for the Jews. But the understanding 
 (it may be presumed) was not that either the 
 one or the other should confine himself strictly 
 to Gentiles, on the one hand, or to Jews, on the 
 other. Neither is it to be supposed that this 
 was an arrangement for life. It suited the 
 existing state of the work, and might be ex- 
 pected to continue until new circumstances 
 called for some modification of it. 
 
 10. Only they would that we should 
 remember the poor, the same Avhich I 
 also was forward to do (which very thing 
 I uias also zenlnus to do) — that is, Paul, inde- 
 pendently of their desire or request, was eager 
 to render assistttnce, through the help of Gen- 
 tile churches to the poor saints in Judea. See 
 
 Kom. 15 : 27 ; 1 Cor. 16 : 1, seq. ; 2 Cor. 7 : 1, 
 seq. ; Acts 11 : 30, seq. ; 24 : 17. The desire 
 of the 'pillar apostles' that Paul and Barna- 
 bas should remember the poverty of the Jew- 
 ish Christians, and render them charitable aid 
 in time of need, shows their friendly feeling; 
 for they would not have asked alms from any 
 but friends. 
 
 11-21. Paul's Ekproof of Peter at 
 Antioch for his Inconsistent Conduct. 
 
 11. But when Peter (Cephas) was come 
 (came) to Antioch, I withstood (resisted) 
 him to the face, because he was to be 
 blamed (stood condemned) — literally, was con- 
 demned; whether by the course which he had 
 allowed himself to take, or by the judgment 
 of the church, we cannot certainly affirm, but 
 are inclined to the former view. Of the fact, 
 however, that he had been and was con- 
 demned, there can be no doubt, as it is certi- 
 fied to us by the inspired apostle. And no one 
 can be rightfully condemned who has not 
 done wrong. The expression, 'resisted him 
 to the face,' accords with all that is known of 
 the openness, the courage, and the decision of 
 Paul. Peter was, in some respects, the first 
 of the apostles, a naturtd leader of men, a 
 path breaker in evangelical work, and one 
 highly esteemed by his brethren. It was, 
 therefore, no easy task to oppose him face to 
 face, because his conduct was inconsistent and 
 disastrous. Yet Paul declares that he did 
 this, and we have every reason to believe his 
 statement strictly true. In the next verse he 
 justifies his declaration that Peter was con- 
 demned as follows : 
 
 12. For before that certain came from 
 James, he did eat with the Gentiles; but 
 when they were come (came\'^ he with- 
 drew (c?rf?<; back) and separated himself, 
 fearing them Avhich (that) were of the 
 circumcision. By such conduct, whatever 
 he maj' have thought of it himself, or what- 
 
 1 Several early documents (viz , X B D* F G, with 
 Origen and a few cursives) read, " but when he (that is, 
 James) came" — ore £c fi\6(v ; butthisisa rcadingwhich 
 even Westcott and llort pronounces "unquestionably 
 
 wrong," though supported by X B, a combination which 
 is usually very strong, yet, in the present case, weak- 
 ened by the ' Western ' documents D * G. 
 
Ch. II.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 31 
 
 13 And tlie other Jews dissembled likewise with 
 hiiu; iiisotuiich thut tJaruabas alsu was curried away 
 with their dissiui ilation. 
 
 14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly 
 accoriliiig to the truth of the gospel, I said uuio Peter 
 before tkem all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after tlie 
 
 13 were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews 
 dissembled likewise with him; insoiiiucli that even 
 Barnabas was carried away with their dissimula- 
 
 14 tion. But when I saw that they walked not 
 uprightly according to the truth oi' the gospel, I 
 said uulo Cephas before thvm all, If thou, beiug 
 
 ever the people may have said of it, Peter 
 was eondenined. The expression 'certain 
 from James ' may signify that the persons in 
 question were sent by him to Antioch, or that 
 they came from the church of which he was 
 the bishop, and professed to represent his 
 opinion. But from all we know of his steadi- 
 ness of mind, it would be unjust to suspect 
 him of authorizing the course pursued by these 
 Judaists. 'Did eat with the Gentiles' — that 
 is to say, was eating with them, or was in the 
 habit of eating with them ; the verb being in 
 the imperfect tense. The Greek verbs ren- 
 dered, 'drew back and separated himself,' de- 
 scribe his action in progress and at completion. 
 lie seems to have broken off his free inter- 
 course with Gentiles somewhat gradually and 
 reluctantly, but at last the separation was the 
 same as that between ordinary Jews and Gen- 
 tiles. Yet observe that he did not do this of 
 Ills own accord— he did it rather through his 
 fear of losing the good will and confidence of 
 the Jewish brethren, represented by those 
 who hiid come there from Jerusalem, and 
 who doubtless had said a great deal about the 
 Jewish manner of life for which James is 
 reported to have been conspicuous. " It is 
 remarkable," says Prof. Jowett, "and may 
 be considered as a proof of the truth of the 
 history, that his conduct, however unintelli- 
 gible, is in keeping witii Peter's character. 
 "We recognize in it the lineaments of him who 
 confessed Christ first, and first denied him; 
 who began by refusing that Christ should 
 wash his feet, and then said, "not my feet 
 only, but my hands and my head" ; who cut 
 off the ear of the servant of the high priest, 
 when they came to tsike Jesus, and then for- 
 sook him and fled. Boldness and timidity — 
 first boldness, then timidity — were the char- 
 acteristics of his nature." But the matter did 
 not end with Peter's withdrawal. Others 
 followed his example. 
 
 13. And the other Jews (the rest of the 
 Jews) dissembled likewise with him : in- 
 somuch that Barnabas also (or, even 
 Jinrnnbns) was carried away with their 
 dissimulation. Thus the weight of Peter's 
 
 example, added to the urgency of their kins- 
 men from the mother church, led tlie other 
 Christian Jews of Antioch to si![)arate them- 
 selves from the Gentiles, though they, as well 
 as Peter, did this against theii better judg- 
 ment. There is no evidence that Peter solic- 
 ited them to take this course. It is even pos- 
 sible that he yielded with many a protest to 
 the Judaizing faction. But that he yielded at 
 all, was a fact that could be used with tremen- 
 dous effect by zealots for the law, and for a 
 brief period it seemed as if a great wave of 
 Jewish ritualism were about to sweep away 
 the old landmarks of the church, as if the 
 form of godliness were to take the place of its 
 power, and pretense get the upper hand of 
 sincerit}'. The second part of the verse shows 
 how powerful was the Judaistic current. 
 'Even Barnabas,' the fast friend tmd enlight- 
 ened companion of Paul, was carried away by 
 it. He was the last man to be moved in that 
 direction, and the circumstance that even he 
 was swept along with the rest, though reluct- 
 antly, shows that a crisis had been reached in 
 the church. But by the good providence of 
 God there was on the ground a ' Hebrew of 
 the Hebrews' whose grasp of principles, and 
 foresight of consequences, and courage in 
 asserting the truth, were equal to the emer- 
 gency. It was for him to wrest the victory 
 from those who must have thought themselves 
 to be already in full possession of the field. 
 
 14. But when I saw that they walked 
 not uprightly according to the truth of 
 the gospel, I said unto Peter (Cephas) 
 before them all. Lightfoot explains the 
 first part of this verse by saying, "they di- 
 verge from the straight path of the gospel 
 truth." "The preposition translated 'accord- 
 ing to' (np'oi) here denotes not the goal to be 
 attained, but the line of direction to be ob- 
 served." The reasons why Paul took occa- 
 sion to reprove Peter before the whole church 
 were doubtless these: that Peter's offense was 
 in some sense public, that its bad influence 
 could be averted in no other way, and that 
 many had dissembled with him and needed 
 reproof as well as he. Both Jews and Gentiles 
 
32 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why com- 
 pellest thou the Oeiililes to live as do ihe Jews? 
 
 15 We uho are Jews by nature, and not sinners of 
 the Gentiles, 
 
 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works 
 of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Ghrist, even we 
 have believed in j'eMis Christ, that we might bejustitied 
 by the faith ol Christ, and not by the works of the law; 
 for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 
 
 a Jew, livest as do the Gentiles, and not as do the 
 Jews, how compellest thou the Gentiles to live 
 
 15 as do the Jews? We being Jews by nature, and 
 
 16 not sinners of the Gentiles, yet knowing that a 
 man is not justified by 'the works of the law, but 
 through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believetl on 
 Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in 
 Christ, and not by the works of the law: because 
 by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 
 
 1 Or, works of law. 
 
 must be made to see that not even this great 
 apostle's example could be safely followed 
 when it was inconsistent with the gospel. If 
 the remedy applied by Paul was drastic, it 
 was without doubt needed tind effectual. Hav- 
 ing the consciences of believing Jews and 
 Gentiles in Antioch on his side, a public 
 method of dealing with the matter was safe 
 and wise; at any rate, it was in keeping with 
 his own character as revealed to us by the 
 New Testament. 
 
 We now come to the address itself, w^hich 
 appears to be rehearsed by the apostle In a 
 condensed form, but with substantial accu- 
 racy'. A few years, it is true (possibly six or 
 seven), had passed since he nitide it, but the 
 occasion was so exigent and the effect of his 
 words so important that they must have been 
 often recalled by him with thankfulness to 
 God for the grace which enabled him to speak 
 them. Moreover, we are justified in believing 
 that the Spirit of inspiration co-operated with 
 natural circumstances in making his memory 
 faitliful. If thou, being a Jew, livest after 
 the manner of the Gentiles, and not as 
 do the JcAvs, why compellest thou the 
 Gentiles to live as do the Jcavs? This 
 direct appeal to the inconsistencj' of Peter's 
 conduct could only be met by confessing that 
 he had done wrong in living as do the Gen- 
 tiles, or by confessing that he was wrong in 
 refusing to live thus, when his refusal would 
 sanction the efforts of the Judaizing party, 
 and would by so much tend to compel the 
 Gentile believers to live as Jews, for the sake 
 of unity and peace. When Paul speaks of 
 Peter as living (present tense) like the Gen- 
 tiles, he refers to his recent and well-known 
 ]iractice ; and he is able to do this with all the 
 more confidence because the principles of 
 Peter would require him to live "ethnically" 
 whenever his apostolic work called for it. It 
 is easy to imagine the consternation which 
 stole into the hearts of 'certain from James,' 
 
 when they heard these words and recollected 
 Peter's visit to Cornelius, his account of the 
 sheet let down from heaven, his speech at the 
 so-ciiUed council, and his intercourse with 
 the Gentile converts before their own arrival 
 in Antioch. Perhaps they began at that 
 moment to see that they had not counted the 
 cost when they undertook to overturn Paul's 
 work in Antioch. His bold and strong words 
 must at least have gone to the conscience of 
 Peter. But Peter was of so true and no~ble a 
 spirit that he could bear reproof tmd listen to 
 argument as well. 
 
 After this argumentum ad /lominem, Paul 
 courteously associates himself with Peter, 
 when it would have been just as easy for him 
 to have continued his address in the second 
 person singular. A little below, with the 
 same spirit of courtesy, he passes to the first 
 person singular, (ver. is.) 
 
 15-16. We who are (literally, we being) 
 Jews by nature, and not sinners of the 
 Gentiles, (yet) knowing that a man is not 
 justified by the works of the law, but 
 (save) by [through) faith in Jesus Christ, 
 even we believed in Jesus Christ, that 
 Ave might be justified by the faith of (in) 
 Christ, and not by the Avorks of the law : 
 for (hecavse) by the works of the laAV no 
 flesh shall be justified. The first clause is 
 concessive: 'Although we were Jews by 
 birth, and not heathen-born sinners'; the 
 second is causal, 'yet because we knew that a 
 man is not justified by the works of the law, 
 but only through faith ' ; the third is declara- 
 tive, 'even we believed on Christ Jesus' ; the 
 fourth is fintil, to the end 'that we might be 
 justified by the faith in Christ, and not by the 
 works of the law ' ; and the fifth confirmatory, 
 'because by the works of the law shall no 
 flesh (or, sinful man) be justified.' There 
 seems at first sight to be some needless repeti- 
 tion in this verse, but, strictly speaking, there 
 is none; the fullness of statement in every 
 
Ch. IL] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 17 But if, while we set-k to be justified by Christ, we 
 ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the 
 minister of sin? God forbid. 
 
 IS l'"()r if I build again the things which I destroyed, 
 1 make myself a transgressor. 
 
 Ij For 1 through the law am dead to the law, that 1 
 might live unto (jod. 
 
 17 But if, while we sought to be ju.stified in Christ, we 
 ourselves also were louiul sinners, is Christ a luin- 
 
 18 ister of sin? (iod forbid. For if I build up again 
 those things which 1 destroyed, I prove myself a 
 
 19 transgressor. For 1 through i the law died uulo 
 
 clause is empliatic. It is, however, to be ob- 
 served that the last sentence, 'because by the 
 deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified," is 
 inserted as an Old Testament proof of the pre- 
 ceding clause. It is probably a free citation 
 of P.-i. 143 : 2, which reads tlius: "And enter 
 not into judgment with thy servant; for in 
 tliy siglit shall no man living be justified." 
 Paul introduces the words, ' by the deeds of 
 the law,' on the assumption that when God is 
 said in the Old Testament to 'enter into judg- 
 ment' with any one, the law must be the 
 standard, obedience to the whole law the only 
 ground of justification, and disobedience to 
 any i)art of it a suflScient ground for condem- 
 nation. To keep tlie law is to keep the whole 
 of it; to break the law is to disobey any com- 
 mand of it. It may also be remarked that the 
 meaning of the ajtostie in the sentence, 'a 
 man is not justified by the works of the law, 
 but (eic pirj) tlirough faith,' is correctly repre- 
 sented in English by translating the Greek 
 (eav fii?, seq. ) 'but only' through faith in 
 Jesus Christ. The whole statement may then 
 be reproduced as follows: 'Although we 
 were Jews by birth, and not heathen-born 
 sinners, yet because we knew that a man is 
 not justified by the works of the law, but only 
 through faith in Jesus Christ, even we, I say, 
 believed on Christ Jesus, in order that we 
 miglit be justified by faith in Christ, and not 
 by works which the law requires; bectiuse by 
 the works of the law (as it is written) shall no 
 flesh be justified.' Compare Kom. 3 : 20. Thus 
 Paul assumes, as a fact which Peter will admit, 
 that both of them had turned away in despair 
 from legal works as a condition of acceptance 
 with God, and had put their trust in Chri.st 
 alone. Let us now see what use he makes of 
 tiiis unquestiornxble fact. 
 
 17. But if, while we seek (sought) to be 
 justified by (in) Christ, we ourselves also 
 are (ve.re) found sinners, is therefore 
 Christ the {a) minister of sin? God for- 
 bid ! It cannot for a, moment be supjiosed, tir- 
 gues Paul, tliatin and by our seeking to be jus- 
 
 C 
 
 tified by Christ, without the works of the law, 
 we also ourselves, as these sticklers for the law 
 affirm, were found in the way of sin and on a 
 plane with tlie Gentiles, for then it would 
 follow that Christ is 'a minister' and pro- 
 moter of sin; a conclusion abhorrent to every 
 believer ! We did not then break the law and 
 commit sin by looking to Christ alone for 
 acceptance with God, although in doing this 
 we ceased to keep the law as a means of justi- 
 fication. Just the opposite of this is true. 
 For if I build (w^;) again the things which 
 I destroyed, I make (prove) myself a 
 transgressor. In this verse the apostle sub- 
 stitutes, with great delicacy of feeling, the 
 first person singular for the first person plural. 
 For the act supposed was precisely that for 
 which Peter stood condemned. "What he had 
 been doing by his example was a building up 
 again of legal observances, which he had be- 
 fore destroyed by testifying that they were no 
 longer obligatory on Christians as the ground 
 of justification, and were means of condemna- 
 tion rather than of justification. The true pur- 
 pose of the law was to convitice men of sin and 
 drive them away from itself to Christ. Hence 
 those who turn back to legal works as a condi- 
 tion of forgiveness and life, transgress the very 
 nature and purpose of the law. This thought 
 is explained and justified by the next verse. 
 Apart from that verse, we might be in doubt 
 respecting the import of this, but with it the 
 meaning of this is perfectly clear. 
 
 19. For I through the law am dead 
 (died) to the law, that I might live unto 
 God. The etnphatic words arc; 'through the 
 law.' "It was the law itself, doing its ap- 
 pointed work, by which I was slain to the 
 law — that is, driven from it and made utterly 
 dead to it as a means of salvation. It refused 
 me hope; it said, 'To rely uptm me is to 
 perish; thou hast sinned, and the soul that 
 sinneth shall die; trust me not, but flee to the 
 mercy of God in Christ.' Thus by the proper 
 action of the law I was made to relinquish all 
 my confidence in it as a means of justification 
 
34 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. II. 
 
 20 1 am crucified with Clirist: nevertheless I live; 
 yet not i, but ( hiist liveth in lue: and the life which 
 1 now live in the flesh I live by ihe taith of the Son of 
 God, who loved me, and gave liim^elf for me. 
 
 20 1 the law, that I might live unto God. I have heen 
 crucified with Christ; and it is no longer 1 that 
 live, but Christ live:li in me: and that lijt which I 
 now live in the tiesh 1 live in faith, Ifiefailh wliich 
 is iu the Son of Ood, who loved me, and gave hini- 
 
 before God. By its own impulsion I turned 
 from it and ceased to have any lite-relation to 
 it, but in this very act I turned to Christ in 
 faith, to the end that I might enter upon a 
 new and true life, a life which is closely re- 
 lated to God, is sustained by his grace, and is 
 consecrated to his service." This appears to 
 be the import of the apostle's language in the 
 ■present verse, and it fully explains and con- 
 firms the preceding verse. 
 
 Paul has now reached the core of the gospel, 
 as understood and preached by him ; and so 
 he must needs dwell upon it a moment longer. 
 For surely this, if anything, will reach the 
 heart of his brother Cephas, and prevail upon 
 hini'to give up the attempt to build again 
 what he has once destroyed. 
 
 20. 1 am {have been) crucified with Christ. 
 Nothing is deeper in the writings of Paul than 
 'his conception of the believer's union with 
 • Christ. He dies to the law and to sin by trust- 
 ing in Christ. His legal standing and his 
 spiritual condition are reversed in a moment 
 by that act and the union which depends upon 
 it. In the preceding verse, and also in this, 
 the reference is chiefly to the former, yet the 
 latter isdoubtless involved. Paul's crucifixion 
 with Christ was first realized at his conver- 
 sion, but the continuance of that crucifixion 
 had been experienced by him all along from 
 that hour to the present. Essentially the same 
 thought is repeated by the apostle in his letter 
 to the Romans; "Knowing this, that our old 
 man was crucified with him, that tl;e body of 
 sin might be done away, that so we should no 
 longer live in bondage to sin ; for he that hath 
 (lied is .justified from sin." (6:6.) Compare also 
 Rom. G: 8; Gal. 5: 24; 6: 14: Col. 2: 20, and 
 Rom 6:4; Col. 2: 12. Translate: And it is 
 no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me. 
 That is, I have no longer a separate existence, 
 for Christ is the life of my life. He is its source, 
 its animating principle, its object. " For to 
 me to live is Christ." (Phii. i :2i.) "When 
 Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested," 
 etc. (Col. 3:4.) "I am the vine, ye are the 
 branches." (Johni5:5.) " I in them, and thou 
 
 in me, that they n.ay be perfected into one." 
 (John 17: 23.) There must be something very 
 real and wonderful to justify such language: 
 a union of Christ witii his people which can 
 only be described by saying that his life per- 
 vades their life, giving it power and purity 
 and peace not its own. And the life which 
 I now live in the flesh. The word 'flesh' 
 is here equivalent to body, and life in the 
 body is conceived to be a life exposed to weak- 
 ness and temptation — a life of toil, of conflict, 
 and perhaps of persecution — a life which will 
 fail of the highest good, unless it be to him 
 who is empowered by the Divine Spirit in the 
 inner man, and looks " not at the things which 
 are seen, but at the things which are not seen." 
 (2 Cor. 4 : 18.) Such a mall was the apostlc. He 
 was in the flesh, but not the servant of it; for 
 he said, "I buftet my body, and bring it into 
 bondage: lest by any means, after that I have 
 preached to others, I myself should be re- 
 jected." (iCor.9:27.) I livc by (yh) the faith 
 of (ivhich is in) the Son of (liod, who loved 
 me, and gave himself (?<7:>) for me. Faith 
 was the element in which Paul was living and 
 breathing, and that faith had for its object the 
 Son of God. In him the apostle trusted, and 
 not in his own righteousness; in the Son of 
 God, and not in legal observances, or holy 
 resolutions, or perfected character. He ex- 
 pected salvation as a free gift through a Divine 
 Saviour. The last clause, 'who loved me and 
 gave himself up for me,' is a pathetic and 
 grateful recognition of Christ's voluntary 
 death for the redemption of sinners, and of 
 the holy impulse which moved him to so groat 
 a sacrifice. At the same time it shows how 
 tender and personal was the relation of Jesus 
 to the apostle, if we accept the apostle's vii-w 
 of that relation. Blessed must this sorely-tried 
 servant of Christ have been when he uttered 
 this sentence, and believed that it would bo as 
 dear to the heart of Peter as to his own I And 
 having said this, he closes with a declaration 
 and a reason for it; both of which relate to 
 the controversy about Jewish observances aa a 
 condition of acceptance with God. 
 
Ch. IL] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 35 
 
 21 I do not frustrate the grace of (iod : for if right- I 21 self up for me. I do not make void the grace of 
 edusuess come by the law, then (Jhiist is dead in vain. bod : for if righteousness is through ' the law, then 
 
 I Christ died for nought. 
 
 21. I do not frustrate (make void) the 
 grace of God — as do those who insist upon 
 obedience to the Jewish Law as a condition 
 of salvation; for if righteousness come by 
 (i.« tkroiKjh) the law, then Christ is dead 
 in vain [died for nought). Evidently Paul 
 assumes that a falling back upon legal works 
 for justification or righteousness is radically 
 inconsistent with justification through faith in 
 Christ. It must be one thing or the other: a 
 combination of the two is out of the question. 
 If a man can be justified by the law, he needs 
 no Saviour. If he needs Christ at all, it is 
 because he is condemed by the law. Observe 
 how closely the death of Christ and the grace 
 of God are here connected. To reject one is 
 to reject tiie other. Indeed, the death of Christ 
 is esteemed by the apostle the grandest expres- 
 sion of God's grace, and anything which pro- 
 claims this death unnecessary is a thorough 
 denial of God's grace in human salvation. 
 There is much reason to believe that Peter 
 was convinced of his mistake by this address 
 of Paul, and that he never fell into the same 
 again. And, though we may regret his timid 
 yielding to Jewish zealots at thi^ time, we 
 cannot be too thankful that Paul was on the 
 ground to maintain the truth in its purity. 
 The narrative has always been troublesome 
 to Roman Catholics, because it shows so clearly 
 the weakness of Peter and his being subject to 
 correction by Paul. To talk of him as prince 
 of the apostles and head of all the church in 
 presence of this piece of history requires vast 
 assurance. Hence, this is by no nieansa favor- 
 ite passage with Roman Catholic writers, and 
 .eonie of them have made desperate attempts 
 to discover in it some other meaning than it 
 obviously contains. But its meaning is indu- 
 bitable. Peter did in this case, as once before, 
 yield to fear, and do what he could not ap- 
 prove. This must be conceded, though with 
 reluctance, by Romanist and Protestant: with 
 rcluctan e by the Romanist, because it dis- 
 agrees with his doctrine of the rectoral 
 supremacy of Peter in the college of the apos- 
 tles and in the whole militant church; and 
 with reluctance by the Protestant also, be- 
 
 cause it seems incompatible with the highest 
 apostolic inspiration. To reconcile this epi- 
 sode in Peter's life with the Papal theory of 
 his being the vicar of Christ on earth seems 
 impoissible, but a few things may be said of its 
 bearing on the doctrine of apostolical inspira- 
 tion. 
 
 First, the circumstance may be recalled, 
 that in the articles of pacification, adopted at 
 Jerusalem a few weeks before, nothing was 
 said in respect to the ii^tercourse of Jewish 
 converts with Gentiles. The Holy Spirit 
 seems to 'have waited for certain events to 
 take place before revealing to Jewish believ- 
 ers the impropriety and danger to Christian 
 life which a permanent observance of the 
 Mosaic ritual involved. He foresaw that the 
 destruction of the temple would at no distant 
 day fill their minds with serious questions as 
 to the duty or possibility of preserving intact 
 their ancestral customs. And there is reason 
 to suppose that not much instruction was given 
 them respecting the evils of their caste system 
 of religious life till they were providentially 
 qualified to receive it kindly. Even Paul, 
 who was perfectly aware of the danger of 
 clinging to legal rites as a condition of accept- 
 ance with God, was willing to live as a Jew 
 with Jews for the sake of gaining them for 
 Christ. He knew, indeed, as did Peter and 
 Barnabas also, that it was right for Jews to 
 mingle freelj' with Gentiles in the service of 
 Jesus, but it does not appear that he or they 
 had been led by the Spirit of God to protest 
 against the course of James and of many 
 others in keeping the law. This must be duly 
 considered in forming an estimate of Peter's 
 conduct. 
 
 Secondly, Peter is not represented as saying 
 anything in justification of his conduct, or 
 against free social intercourse on the part f)f 
 Jews with Gentiles. He seems to have yielded 
 to pressure in so far as his action was con- 
 cerned, but he may have hoped to gain the 
 Judaizers by temporary concessions. He may 
 have said to them: "I go with you, becau.se 
 my mission is to you rather than to the Gen- 
 tiles, but I do not admit the correctness of 
 
36 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 FOOLISH Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that 
 ye bhoiild not obey the truth, before whose eyes 
 Jesus Christ halh beeu evidently set lorth, crucitied 
 among you ? 
 
 O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before 
 
 whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set lorth cruci- 
 
 your position, or concede that it was wrong 
 for me to eat with Gentiles ; and I expect that 
 you will soon look at the matter as I do!" 
 Such a course may have seemed to Cephas 
 almost necessary, at least for a time, and the 
 far-reaching consequences of it may have 
 been overlooked by him until Paul brought 
 them to mind. 
 
 Thirdly, from this instance, as well as from 
 the liistory of the ancient prophets in Israel, it 
 is evident that divine inspiration was never 
 meant to insure a perfect life to its possessor. 
 There is but one such life described in the New 
 Testament, and none in the Old. Somewhere, 
 then, a line must be drawn between teaching 
 and conduct, and it must be conceded that a 
 hian may be enabled to deliver a true message 
 from God, though his knowledge and his life 
 are imperfect. 
 
 Fourthly, it is worth while to remember 
 that God's providence is a factor of history. 
 A man was then present in Antioch by the 
 •will of God who could meet the emergency in 
 such a way that even Peter's dissimulation 
 was overruled for good. Humanly consid- 
 ered, it was just the place and the time for this 
 occurrence. A great and hitherto unsettled 
 question could now be answered in such a 
 manner as to satisfy the Gentiles, if not the 
 Jews. It was thus answered in strict agree- 
 ment with the spirit and genius of Christi- 
 anity. If the divine hand is ever discernible 
 in human affairs, it is in this sad but important 
 transaction at Antioch. And it was a trans- 
 action, the recital of which could not fail to 
 impress upon the Galatians the high authority 
 of Paul as a Christian teacher, and the per- 
 fect clearness and truth of his gospel. It intro- 
 duced, therefore, in a most effective manner 
 the argument which he was about to make in 
 support of the doctrine of salvation by the 
 grace of God through faith in Christ. 
 
 Ch. 3 : In support of his gospel, that justifi- 
 cation is of grace through faith, Paul now 
 appeals : 
 
 1. To THEIR Experience of the Grace 
 
 OF God through Faith in Christ Cruci- 
 fied. (1-5.*) — "Having thus, in the first two 
 chapters, vindicated his authority as an apos- 
 tle, or, in other words, shown that the gospel 
 which he preached must be true, because he 
 was taught it by direct revelation, Paul pro- 
 ceeds in the next place to argue the truth of 
 this gospel, from a consideration of the system, 
 both as viewed in itself and as attested by the 
 appropriate external marks of its divine char- 
 acter. A summary of the argument as devel- 
 oped in this connection is the following: The 
 gratuitous system of justification as contained 
 in the gospel must be the true one in opposi- 
 tion to that of merit or works; first, because 
 the Holy Spirit accompanies its reception as a 
 witness that those who embrace it are the chil- 
 dren of God (ver. 2-4) ; sccond, bccausc it has 
 been sanctioned by miracles (ver. 5) ; third, be- 
 cause it accords with the manner in which 
 Abraham was justified (ver. 6, 7) ; fourth, be- 
 cause it fulfills the predictions of the Old Tes- 
 tament, which declare that Christ was to be 
 the medium through which spiritual blessing 
 should be conferred on mankind (ver. 8. 9) ; fifth, 
 because it iigrees with the entire teaching of 
 the Old Testament in regard to the justifying 
 power of faith (ver. ii); and, finally, because it 
 is the only system adapted to men as sinners." 
 
 "In confirmation of this last point, it is 
 shown that on the ground of obedience justifi- 
 catiim is impossible, because the obedience 
 which the law demands must be perfect; and 
 as no individual renders this, it is evident that 
 as many as are of the law are under the curse. 
 Under these circumstances, therefore, Christ 
 gave himself as a ransom to redeem us from 
 the curse of the law, being made himself a 
 curse for us, and thus providing a way of sal- 
 vation which is applicable to all. Gentiles as 
 well as Jews, on condition of faith. (Ter. lo, 
 VM4.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 1. O foolish Galatians, who hath be> 
 witched yoii, etc. By these words Paul 
 resumes his direct appeal to the Galatians. 
 Having vindicated his claim to be an apostle, 
 instructed by Christ himself through revela- 
 tion, and recognized as their peer by the elder 
 
Ch. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 37 
 
 2 Tliis only would I learn of you, Received ye the 
 Spirit by ihe works of llie law, or by the hearing of 
 lailh? 
 
 ;{ Are ye so f<K)lish? having begun in the Spirit, are 
 ye now made perl'eci by ihu heah'/ 
 
 2 fied? This only would I learn from you, Received ye 
 the t?pirit by i the works of the law, or by the - he;u- 
 
 3 iug of faith? Are ye. so foolish? haviug begun iu 
 
 1 Or, worlu of law 'i Or, meseage. 
 
 apostles, he is brought, by the repetition of 
 hiii protest and argument against Peter's 
 course ia Antioch, to tlie deepest ground of 
 his opposition to the Judaislic error, wliicli is, 
 that it nullifies the grace of God by virtually 
 pronouncing Ciirist's death unnecessary. So 
 irrational does this appear to the deeply 
 moved apostle, that he cannot refrain from 
 great plainness of speech in addressing the 
 Gulatians. Their course suggests the influ- 
 ence of such fascination as is popularly attrib- 
 uted to "the evil eye." It is a surprising, 
 unaccountable course, especially when the 
 apostle recalls the clearness with which he 
 had portrayed to them the atoning death of 
 Clu-ist.i 
 
 Before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath 
 been evidently (was openly) set forth cru- 
 cified? — that is, was portrayed as crucified. 
 The word translated 'was openly set forth' 
 (n-poevpo<f>r|) Is used to remind them of the 
 clear and vivid manner in which Paul had 
 delineated the death of Christ; and the word 
 'crucified' {eaTa.vpmit.tvot], placed for the sake of 
 emphasis at the end of the sentence, is used 
 to recall the dreadful character of that death. 
 The language of this clause is interesting as 
 giving a hint of the "matter and manner" of 
 Paul's preaching. In Galatia, as well as in 
 Corinth, the substance of his message was, 
 'Jesus Christ, and him crucified.' See 1 Cor. 
 1 : 2.3, seq. And his manner, it cannot be 
 doubted, was bold, earnest, impassioned, and 
 often tender, (xcu-to-.n.) The question of this 
 verse, indicating so much surprise and sorrow, 
 is followed by other questi(ms which show the 
 reasons for his surprise at the irrationality of 
 their conduct. They V)ring out the inconsist- 
 ency and folly of it in striking language. 
 
 2. This only would I learn o( (from) 
 you. As if the answer to the single question 
 lie was about to propose would be conclusive 
 of the whole matter. Received ye the 
 
 Spirit by {the) works of {the) law or by 
 {the) hearing of faith? The preposition 
 translated 'by' signifies out of, as a result 
 of, or, by means of. In this place it is prop- 
 erly rendered 'by,' in the sense of, by means 
 of. The noun wliich is translated 'hearing' 
 is also used to denote organ of hearing, or ear, 
 and what is heard, whether it be instruction 
 or rumor. Hence, it is an open question 
 whether Paul describes them as having re- 
 ceived the Holy Spirit by hearkening to the 
 good news with faith, t)r by means of preach- 
 ing, which' related to faith as the condition of 
 justification. In either case the emphasis falls 
 upon faith as contrasted with works. And as 
 he appeals to their own experience, it is almost 
 certain that the works of the Holy Spirit had 
 been so marked at the time of their conver- 
 sion — and, probably, afterward — as to be 
 easily perceived by them and distinguished 
 from everything else in their inner life. It is 
 likewise probable that many of them had 
 been endowed with special gifts by the Spirit 
 of God, as those of prophecy, speaking with 
 tongues, or miracles. Of course, the apostle 
 conceives of but one answer as possible to the 
 question proposed. They had received the 
 Spirit by listening with faith to the gospel of 
 Christ. This was certain to him, and, in his 
 opinion, certain to them as well. 
 
 3. Are ye so foolish? Namelj", as the 
 next question is about to suggest. In the New 
 Testament, the adverb 'so' (oOtw?) often points 
 to what follows. Having begun in the 
 Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the 
 flesh? Compare 2 Cor. 8:6; Phil. 1 : 6. 
 Perhaps the middle sense of the verb is pref- 
 erable, 'Are ye now making an end in the 
 flesh ? ' " Having made a beginning in Chris- 
 tianity, are ye now making an end in Juda- 
 ism ? " (Boise.) One becomes a Christian, 
 not by natural birth, but by spiritual birth, 
 "That which isborn of the flesh is flesh, and that 
 
 •The words 'that ye should not otiey the truth' I were added from Gal. 5 : 7. They are omitted by 
 must, be rejected as fomiing no part of the original Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and the 
 text. They are wanlin<; i ii X -^ B D ' F" <^1 P, <''nd some Revised Version, 
 of the best cursives. LIghlfoot conjectures that they | 
 
38 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 4 Have ye suffered so many thiugs in vain ? if it be 
 yet in vain. 
 
 5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, 
 and workelh miracles among you, doth he it by the 
 ■works ot the law, or by the hearing of faith ? 
 
 4 the Spirit, ' are ye now perfected in the flesh? Pid 
 ye sutl'oi- so many things in vain ? if it l)e indeed in 
 
 5 vain. He therefore who supplieth to you the .spirit, 
 and worketh ■- miracles 3 among you/ilortfi he it by 
 * the works of the law, or by the'* hearing of faith? 
 
 1 Or, do ye now make an end in the flcah J 2 Gr. powers 3 Or, in 4 Or. morAs o/ law 5 Oi-, j 
 
 which is born of the Spirit is spirit." (John 3 : 6.; 
 'Ill the Spirit' refers to the element in which 
 the new life of the Christian has its beginning 
 now, as well as in the tirst age. But the 
 Jewish rites, which the Galatians were urged 
 to observe as necessary to salvation, were 
 carnal ordinances, intended to be superseded 
 by the heart worship of a more spiritual econ- 
 omy. 
 
 4. Have ye suffered so many things in 
 vain? — or, according to the Kevised Version, 
 ''Did ye suffer?' etc. Just what sufferings 
 for Christ's sake these Galatian disciples may 
 have borne we do not know. But the perti- 
 nency' and force of the apostle's question de- 
 pend upon their severity. Light sufterings 
 would not have suggested such an appeal. 
 Their liberty in Christ must have been pur- 
 chased at no small cost of afflictions. And 
 the apostle calls upon them to consider the 
 question whether they are ready to look upon 
 their endurance of wrong in the past as use- 
 less. Had they been following a "will o' the 
 wisp" into all manner of distress ever since 
 they received the gospel and put their trust in 
 Christ? The pertinenceof thisquestion would 
 be more obvious still if a large part of their 
 sufferings had been due to Jewish enmit3' 
 against Christians — an enmity which the^' 
 would not have provoked if they had kept 
 the Jewish law. 
 
 Many give to the word translated 'have 
 suffered' the meaning ''have experienced,' 
 and understand 'many things' to signify 
 blessings. This interpretation suits the con- 
 text perfectly ; and the verb certainly has 
 this meaning sometimes in classical Greek. 
 But, aside from this passage, it never has that 
 meaning in the New Testament, and hence 
 we liesitate to fall back upon it here. If it 
 be yet (or, indeed) in vain — 'As your atti- 
 tude toward Judaism seems now to affirm ! ' 
 Yet there is also suggested by this clause a 
 
 half-hidden hope that the fruit of their suffer- 
 ings will not be lost by their actual adopti^in 
 of the Judaistic error. Paul leaves the path 
 open to a return to the way of life which they 
 had formerh' entered with joy in the Lord. The 
 meaning of this clause is admitted to be ob- 
 scure, but that which we have stated is more 
 obvious than any other, and it agrees witli the 
 course cf thought in this pai't of the apostle's 
 argument. Lightfoot's note is striking.^ 
 
 5. He therefore that ministereth to you 
 the Spirit, or that siipplieth to ■t/ou the Spirit. 
 The apostle now returns to the thought of 
 ver. 2 and 3, from which he has deviated for 
 an instant that he might refer to their heroic 
 sufterings on account of fidelity to the truth. 
 But even that deviation was merely formal, 
 if we suppose that he regarded, and expected 
 his readers to regard, their endurance of suf- 
 ferings as a fruit of the Spirit's work in their 
 hearts, giving them strength to bear affliction 
 with joy. According to tiiis view, the con- 
 junction 'therefore' is resumptive, or, per- 
 haps more exactly, as EUicott remarks of the 
 original word (ovi/), '^ continuative and retro- 
 spective rather than illative." Every inter- 
 preter knows that in the Gospel of John the 
 same word (ovv) is frequently translated 'then' 
 instead of 'therefore,' because the sentences 
 introduced by it do not appear to be in any 
 obvious sense inferences from that which pre- 
 cedes them. So here the sense would be 
 clearly expressed by translating: 'He then 
 who is supplying to you the Sjiirit,' etc. And 
 worketh miracles among you (or, in you). 
 The ambiguity of the last words cannot be 
 certainly removed by anything in the preced- 
 ing language or in the context. They may 
 signify' 'in you' or 'among you,' though 
 there is a slight presumption in favor of the 
 former, as giving the ordinary meaning of 
 the preposition, if the sense of the passage 
 thus rendered is equally satisfactory. For 
 
 1 ' If it be really in vain.' It is hard to believe this ; 
 the apostle hopes better things of his converts. Ei yt 
 leaves a loophole for doubt, and koI widens this, imply- 
 ing an unwillingness to believe on the part of the 
 
 speaker. The alternative rendering, ' If it is onfy in 
 vain, and not worse than in vain,' secais harsh and 
 improbable. 
 
Ch. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 39 
 
 6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was ac- 
 counleU lo him for righiemisuess. 
 
 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of fuith, 
 the same are the children of Abraham. 
 
 6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned 
 
 7 unto him for righteousness. ' Know therefore that 
 they who are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham. 
 
 1 Or, Te percev 
 
 ' worketh miracles in you,' see 1 Cor. 12: 
 28 and Mutt. 14 : 2. Thus understood, 
 Paul must refer to spiritual gifts, such as 
 speaking with tongues, interpretation of 
 tongues, discerning of spirits, propheysing, 
 and tlie like, which were bestowed by the 
 Holy Spirit according to his own will. Yet 
 bodily cures of an extraordinary character in 
 answer to praj'er might perhai)S be described in 
 tliese terms. If, however, the versions are 
 correct in translating the words 'among you,' 
 th.s principal reference may be to miracles in 
 the w(»rld of sense, though others would not 
 of necessity be e.xcluded. At all events, the 
 apostle here appeals to miracles as unques- 
 tionable facts in the history of the Galatian 
 churches, and founds upon them an argu- 
 ment against the Judaistic teaching, that men 
 could not be acceptable to God through faith 
 in Christ, without obeying the Jewish Law. 
 
 Doeth he it by the works of the law, or 
 by the hearing of faith? The subject of the 
 whole sentence is without any doubt God, and 
 the manifest assumption of the apostle is, that 
 the gift of the Holy Spirit to the Galatians, 
 and his marvelous working in them, had de- 
 pended in no degree on their obedience to 
 the Jewish Law, but altogether on their faith 
 in Christ. Indeed, there is no evidence that 
 they had yet observed the Jewish rites to any 
 considerable extent, or, if any of them had done 
 this, Paul was certain that they could not as- 
 cribe this working of the Holj' Spirit in them 
 or among them to their legal works. Hence he 
 presses the question boldly as one that must 
 receive an answer which would refute all pos- 
 sible arguments for keeping the law as a con- 
 ditinn of justification with God. 
 
 2. Confirmation of this View by an 
 Appeal to the Bible ArcouxT of Abra- 
 ham's Justification. (0-9.) 
 
 6. Even as Abraham believed God, and 
 it was accounted (m'/oinrrf ) to him for 
 righteousness. The answer of the previous 
 question is left to be supplied by the reader. 
 It must be: 'surely of faith,' and with this in 
 mind the apostle adds: 'Even as Abraham 
 believed God,' etc. The phraselogy of the 
 
 quotation is borrowed from the Septuagint 
 Version of Gen. 15 : 6, wliich, however, fairly 
 reproduces the sense of tlie Hebrew original. 
 That original is translated in the Canterbury 
 lievision : "And he believed in the Lord, and 
 he counted it to him for rigiiteousiiess." The 
 same passage is quoted by the apostle in his 
 Epistle to the Romans (< ; sj with the important 
 comment: "Now to him that worketh, the 
 reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of 
 debt. But to him that worketh not, but be- 
 lieveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, 
 his faith is reckoned for righteousness." 
 (ver. 4and5.) Clearly, then, according to Paul, 
 Abraham's faith was accepted by God, in 
 place of righteousness, or a perfect life, as a 
 condition of jiLstification. "Because of this 
 faith in Christ," says Martin Luther, "God 
 seeth not my doubting of his good-will toward 
 me, my distrust, heaviness of spirit, and otiier 
 sins which are yet in me. For as long as I live 
 in the flesh, sin is truly in me. But because I am 
 covered under the sliadow of Chri.st's wings, 
 as is the chicken under the wing of the hen, 
 and dwell without fear under that most ample 
 and large heaven of the forgiveness of sin.s, 
 which is spread over me, God covereth and 
 pardoneth the remnant of sin in me — that is 
 to say, because of that faith wherewith I began 
 to lay hold upon Christ, he accepteth my im- 
 perfect righteousness even for perfect right- 
 eousness, and counteth my sin for no sin, which 
 notwithstanding is sin indeed." 
 
 7. Know ye therefore that they which 
 are of faith, the same are the children of 
 Abraham. With equal propriety the verse 
 maybe rendered : Ve know therefore that they 
 who are of faith, these are sons of Abraham. 
 The word 'these' is emphatic, these and no 
 others. Though the imperative 'know' is more 
 animated than the indicative 'ye know' or 
 perceive, it seems less natural in a passage so 
 argumentative as this has now become. The 
 readers are presumed to see that only persons 
 of the same religious spirit as Abraham can be 
 properly called his sons. Compare the same 
 apostle's words in Rom. 4:11, seq., and the Sav- 
 iour's words in John 8:8, 39. Lightfoot explains 
 
40 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 8 And the Scripture, forseeing that God would justify 
 the heatheu thiuugh fauli, ( reached beloie ilie gospel 
 unto Abraham, suymy, lu thee shall all nations be 
 blessed. 
 
 y !So then ihey which be of faith are blessed with 
 faithful Abraham. 
 
 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God ' would justify 
 the -Gentiles by faith, jireached the gospel before- 
 hand unto Abraham, suyiuy, lu thee shall all the 
 
 9 nations be blessed. So then they who are of faith 
 
 1 Gr. justifteth 2 Gr. nations. 
 
 the phrase 'who are of faith' (oi U 7ri<TTc<os) as 
 meaning, "they whose stsiriing-point, whose 
 fundamental principle is faith," and Sieffert- 
 Meyer says that it " designates the believers 
 according to their specilic peculiarity geneti- 
 cally. Faith is that from wliich their spirit- 
 ual condition springs. Compare Rom. 2:8; 
 3: 26; 4: 14; John 18: 37." 
 
 8. And the Scripture, foreseeing that 
 God would justify the heathen through 
 faith, the Gentiles by faith. 'The Scripture' 
 is here personified as having divine foresight, 
 doubtless because it is conceived of as being the 
 word, and til ere fore, virtually, the intelligence 
 of God. Compare Rom. 4 : 3, 9, 17 ; Jolin 7 : 38, 
 •where it is spoken of as saying that which 
 God says in and by it. The verb ' would jus- 
 tify ' is in the present tense to denote the rule 
 of action fixed in the mind of God and fol- 
 lowed by him. And the words 'by faith ' are 
 emphatic, containing the jirincipal thought of 
 the participial clause. Preached before the 
 gospel unto Abraham. See Revised Ver- 
 sion. Of course, it was God, whose words 
 were subsequently recorded and are preserved 
 in Scripture, who did this. In the personifi- 
 cation, the Scripture is siinply said to do what 
 God, the Supreme Author of it, really did. 
 Saying, In thee shall all (the) nations be 
 blessed. "That promise was an evangel be- 
 fore the evangel." (Sieffert.) It is to be found 
 in Gen. 12:3, according to the.Septuagint, 
 though the apostle has substituted 'all the 
 nations' for 'all the families of the earth.' 
 In Gen. 18: 18 the same promise is repeated 
 ■with reference to Abraham: "And all the 
 nations of the earth shall be blessed in him." 
 The precise sense of 'in thee' cannot be easily 
 fixed. Lightfoot says: "'In thee,' as their 
 spiritual father" ; but we ask, In what sense 
 is Abraham the spiritual father of believing 
 Gentiles? Eilicott says a little more: "'In 
 thee' as the spiritual father of all the faithful, 
 — the preposition with its usual force specify- 
 ing Abraham as the .^uhstratmn, foundntion, 
 on which, and in which, the blessing rests. 
 
 Compare 1 Cor. 7 : 14." But this seems to put 
 Abraham very nearly' in the place which Paul 
 everywhere else a.ssigns to Chri.st. Sieffert 
 remarks: " ' In thee,' that is, in this fact, that 
 thou art blessed, is contained (as a conse- 
 quence) the being blessed of all the heathen, 
 in so far, namely, as all the heathen were 
 to attain through faith to justification and 
 through justification to the reception of the 
 Holy Spirit, but in the blessing of Abraham, 
 the father of all believers (Rom. 4), the connec- 
 tion of faith and justification was revealed 
 and established for all future time." This 
 is better. Jowett thinks that 'in thee' is equiv- 
 alent to "in thee as their type," or "in thy 
 faith," adding that "the general meaning is 
 as follows: It was not a mere accident that it 
 was said, 'In thee shall all the Gentiles be 
 blessed ' ; but because Abraham was justified 
 by faith, as the Gentiles were to be justified 
 by faith." It may then be sufficient to say 
 that Abraham was the primary and palmary 
 example of justification by faith, in whom 
 were made known to mankind the principle 
 I and condition on which all men in subsequent 
 ' ages were to find acceptance with God. There- 
 I fore all who resemble him in faith are called 
 his sons, and their justification is conceived of 
 ! as but a repetition or amplification of his. 
 ! There does not appear to be any explicit ref- 
 erence to Christ in the word 'thee' ; that ref- 
 erence is to be found in the added words of 
 ver. 16, "thy seed." 
 
 9. So then they which (thai) be of faith 
 are blessed with faithful Abraham. Here, 
 by way of general conclusion, Paul affirms 
 that believers are blessed with the believing 
 Abraham. 'With Abraham' the apostle now 
 writes, not 'in him' ; by which the joint par- 
 ticipation in the blessing of God on the same 
 terms is simply and strongly affirmed. The 
 spiritual attitude toward God which was ac- 
 ceptable in the case of Abraham is acceptable 
 in every man, whether Jew or Gentile. Com- 
 pare Rom. 4: 23. 
 
 Paul has now appealed, (a) to the early ex- 
 
C:i. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 41 
 
 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are 
 under the curse: for it is written, Cursed «• every one 
 that couiiiiuoih not in ;ill thiugs which are written iu 
 the book of the law to do Iheui. 
 
 10 are blessed with the faithful Abraham. For as many 
 as are of i the works of the law are under a curse : 
 lor it is written, Cursed is every one who coutinuelh 
 not in all things that arc written iu the book of the 
 
 1 Or, works of law. 
 
 ])erience which the Gahitiaiis eiijoj'ed of the 
 Holy Spirit's wurk in their hearts, (6) to the 
 great sufferings wliich they had been enabled 
 to bear for Christ's sake, and (c) to the extra- 
 ordinary spiritual gifts which tliey had re- 
 ceived—all coming to them througii faith in 
 Christ, without the performance of legal 
 works,— as proof that not such works, but 
 rather faith, is the condition of acceptance 
 with God. Tills truth he has also contirmed 
 by showing through the testimony of Script- 
 ure (n) that Abraham was justified by faith, 
 and (6) that all the nations are to be partakers 
 of the grace of God on the same terms with 
 him. His next step is to prove from the Holy 
 Scriptures : 
 
 3. That No Sinner can be Justified 
 AND Blessed by God on the Ground of 
 hisObediencetothe Law. (10-12.) — Light- 
 ft)0t's summary or paraphrase is excellent: 
 "Having shown by positive proof that justifi- 
 cation is of faith, he strengthens his position 
 by the negative argument derived from the 
 impossibility of maintaining its opposite, jus- 
 tification by law. This negative argument is 
 twofold: First, it is impossible to fulfill the 
 requirements of the law, and the non-fulfill- 
 ment lays us under a curse (ver. lo) ; secondly, 
 supposing the fulfillment possible, still the 
 spirit of the law is antagonistic to faith, which 
 is elsewhere spoken of as the source of life, 
 (ver. 11, 12-)" Ctmipare the analysis of Hackett 
 before the notes on ver. 1. 
 
 10. For as many as are of the works of 
 the law are under the («) curse. This is 
 introduced by 'for,' because it is meant to be 
 a confirmation of the conclusion just stated, 
 that men are justified through faith. The 
 general premise admitted by all Christians 
 was that men may be justified. The special 
 premise here assumed is that this must be 
 effected in one of two opposite ways, through 
 faith or through obedience to law. Having 
 produced evidence from the experience of the 
 Galatian believers, and from the word of God, 
 that men have been from of old until now 
 justified through faith, he confirms his posi- 
 tion that this is the way, and indeed the only 
 
 way, by showing from the same divine word 
 that they cannot be justified by obedience to 
 the law. Compare Rom. 4 : 15. By those who 
 'are of works of law' are meant those " whose 
 character is founded on worUs of law." Their 
 spirit is the legal spirit, a spirit which is fos- 
 tered by legal observances when these are 
 looked upon as the ground of acceptance with 
 God. The exact shade of thought intended 
 here is probably "those who depend on them 
 for justification." (Boise.) For it is written. 
 Cursed is every one that coutiiiueth not 
 in all things which are written in the 
 book of the law, to do them. See Deut. 
 27 : 26. Quoted freely from the Septuagint 
 which, in turn, is a free translation of the He- 
 brew. For the Hebrew reads: "Cursed be 
 he that confirmeth not the words of this law to 
 do them " ; the Septuagint, " Cursed be every 
 man that continueth not in all the words of 
 this law to do them"; and Paul, as above, 
 inserts the words, 'in the book of,' and substi- 
 tutes 'the things written in' for 'the words 
 of But these changes do not affect the sense 
 of the passage. They merely serve to bring 
 out more distinctly the meaning contained in 
 the briefer original. The word 'cursed' sig- 
 nifies "condemned and suffering God's just 
 displeasure." The effect of that condemna- 
 tion was not, in the case of the chosen people, 
 reserved altogether to a future state. It often 
 took the form of temporal calamities. Yet 
 under the clearer light of the Saviour's teach- 
 ing we learn that it will eventuate in eternal 
 ruin. The final clause, ' to do them,' describes 
 the way in which one must 'confirm' or 'con- 
 tinue in' all the requirements of the law, in 
 order to escape condemnation. Perfect obe- 
 dience, obedience in all things, is demanded. 
 Transgression in one point is sin. James re- 
 fers to the same fact: "For whosoever shall 
 keep the whole law, and yet stumble in on& 
 point, he is become guilty of all." (2:10.) Paul's 
 statement, then, means that all who depend 
 upon works of the law for justification are 
 c<indemned ; for every one who fails to obey 
 that law perfectly is condemned, and every 
 man has failed and will fail to obey it thus.' 
 
42 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the 
 sight of Ciod, U is evident : for, The just shall live by 
 faith. 
 
 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that 
 doeth them shall live in ihem. 
 
 11 law to do them. Now that no man is justified i by 
 the law in the sight of (iod, is evident: for. The 
 
 12 righteous shall live by I'aith ; and the law is not of 
 faith; but. He that doeth them shall live in them. 
 
 Hence justification bj' legal works is impossi- 
 ble, and as many as rely upon them for it are 
 under a curse. To make this doubly certain 
 he presents the matter in another light, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 11. But [now) that no man is justified 
 by the law in the sight of God, it is evi- 
 dent : for, The just {righteous) shall live 
 by faith. Compare Rom. 1 : 17 ; B : 21, seq.; 
 Heb. 10:38. The cogency of this reasoning 
 depends on the assumption tliat justification by 
 legal works cannot blend with or be co-ordi- 
 nate with justification by faith. The methods 
 diflTer radically ; one excludes the other. And 
 this is the more evident after what is said in 
 the preceding verse, which really shows that 
 the only persons to be justified are sinners. 
 ' By the law ' might be rendered ' in the law,' 
 that is, in its sphere and domain, where it de- 
 termines the standing of every one. 'The 
 righteous shall live by faith.' SeeHab. 2: 4. 
 Another rendering which is adopted by many 
 scholars, connects 'faith' with the adjective 
 'righteous' instead of the verb 'shall live,' 
 thus: 'He, who is righteous by faith, shall 
 live.' This rendering suits the argutiient of 
 Paul better than the ordinary one. but it is 
 not so natural a translation of the original 
 text. For that appears to mean : ' The right- 
 eous man will live through his steadfast trust' 
 (in God). "The word rendered 'faith'," 
 says Cook, in the "Bible Commentary," " has 
 the fundamental sense of steadfastness, hence 
 trustworthiness, faithfulness in the discharge of 
 all duties, especially of promises; as a personal 
 quality, truth in deed and word, and in man's 
 relation to God, firm belief and reliance on the 
 divine promise, the special sense in this pas- 
 sage ; whatever may betide others who "will 
 not believe" (Hab. i:d), the righteous who be- 
 lieves and trusts will live. Tliat the word is 
 properly rendered 'faith,' taken in the full, 
 true sense of trustful faith, is clear from the 
 usage of the word in the palmary text: "And 
 he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him 
 for righteousness." (Geu.isie.) That such re- 
 
 liance or faith is meant in our passage is evi- 
 dent; it is deniiinded by a clause in the pre- 
 ceding verse : " wait for it." (Hab. 2:3.) 
 
 And the law is not of faith. That is, ac- 
 cording to the apostle, faith is not the working 
 principle of the law, the idea from which it 
 proceeds and upon which it depends for its efii- 
 cac3'. Compare Rom. 10 : 5. But, the man 
 that doeth (or, hath done) them shall live 
 in them. An abbreviated quotation of Lev. 
 18:5: " Ye shall keep my statutes, and my 
 judgments, which if a mtin do, he shall live in 
 them." Hence obedience is the condition of 
 true life under the law. Doing, not believing, 
 is the central idea of the legal system. Hft 
 that has done what the law requires shall have 
 life in and by the works which he has per- 
 formed. By epitomizing the words of Levi- 
 ticus so freely, Paul shows that he believed the 
 Galatians to be familiar with this part of the 
 Old Testament. It is possible that he had 
 himself used it for a similar pur|iose when 
 with them, and equally jxtssible that it was 
 frequently used by the Judaizing teachers who 
 hiid come among them since his last visit. To 
 infer from the apostle's free manner of citing 
 the Old Testament in this instance that the 
 Galatians were known by him to be well ac- 
 quainted with the entire Old Testament would 
 be going too far; yet a similar usage meets us 
 in the Epistle to the Romans, and it is per- 
 fectly safe to conclude that he was in the habit 
 of appealing to the Old Testament in his 
 preaching, and that the churches founded by 
 him, as well as those founded by the apostles 
 of the circumcision, were taught to search the 
 Scriptures to see 'whether these things were 
 so.' (Acts 17:11.) A good cxamplc for all to 
 follow! No part of the Bible has become an- 
 tiquated and useless, and no class of men is 
 excused from the direct examination of the 
 sacred record. It was given to the people 
 originally, and was adapted to their capacity. 
 It is suited to them now, for their intelligence 
 is not inferior to that of men in the apostolic age. 
 Having shown that all who rely upon legal 
 
Ch. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 43 
 
 i:j Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the 
 law, being luaile a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed 
 is every one tliat liangeih on a tree: 
 
 H That ihe tiks>inf; of Abraliani might come on the 
 Geuliles through .le.siis Christ; that we might receive 
 the promise of the spirit through laith. 
 
 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having 
 become a curse for us: for it is written, (.'ursed is 
 
 14 every one that hangcth on a tree: that upon the 
 lieiitilcs might come the blessing of Abraham in 
 Christ Jesus; tliai we might receive the promise of 
 the Spirit through faith. 
 
 works for justification before God are under 
 a curse, the apostle now explains how it is — 
 
 4. That some through the Exercise 
 OF Faith have beex Delivered from 
 THAT Curse. (13, 14.) 
 
 13. Christ hath retleemed us from the 
 curse of the law, being made (having be- 
 come) a curse for us. Tlie sense would be 
 truly expressed if the last clause were trans- 
 lated ' by becoming a curse for us.' For the 
 participle shows how the redemption was ef- 
 fected, ratlier than something which preceded 
 that redemption. And the word 'redeemed' 
 signifies, literally, 'bought out from,' in this 
 case from the curse or condemnation of the 
 violated law. It is most frequently applied to 
 the act of ransoming one from .slaverj'. The 
 particular way in which 'Clirist hath re- 
 deemed us,' by becoming a curse for us, is 
 explained b^' the following quotation. And 
 the sense in which he became a curse for us is 
 explained in some measure by the apostle's 
 language in 2 Cor. 5:21: "Him who knew 
 no sin he made to be sin in our behalf, tliat we 
 might become the righteousness of God in 
 him." He suffered death, as though he were 
 a sinner, in behalf of those who were sinners. 
 He bore the punishment due to them for their 
 sins. The noun 'curse' is more forcible than 
 the adjective 'cursed.' Besides, in the Jewish 
 ritual "the victim is regarded as bearing the 
 sins of those for wiiom atonement is made. 
 The curse is transferred from them to it. It 
 becomes in a certain sense the impersonation 
 of the sin and of the curse. This idea is very 
 prominent in the scapegoat." (Lightfoot. ) 
 For it is written — or, 'because it has been 
 written.' That is to say, in the Sacred Script- 
 ures. When this formula is used in the New 
 Testament it always refers to something which 
 stands written in the Old Testament. So high 
 was the character of that volume, so abso- 
 lutely unique its position and authority, that 
 it alone was suggested when anything was 
 spoken of as written, unless some qualifying 
 statement was added. Cursed is every one 
 that han<i;eth on a tree. This expression is 
 taken from the Septuagint of Deut. 21 : 23, 
 
 with an omission of the words 'by God,' thus: 
 "For every one hanged upon a tree is cursed 
 by God." The Hebrew of Deut. 21 : 22, 23, is 
 thus translated" in the Revised Version : "And 
 if a man have committed a sin worthy of 
 death, and he be put to death, and thou hang 
 him on a tree; his body shall not remain all 
 night upon the tree, but tliou shalt bury him 
 the same day : for he that is hanged is accursed 
 by God." Hanging was a public exposure 
 after death in the case of great crimiiuils, 
 which added to the ignominy and shame of 
 their punishment. Jesus Christ, then, suf- 
 fered death in a form prescribed for the worst 
 criminals, and was treated after a manner 
 which signified that the curse of God rested 
 on him. His body was not allowed to remain 
 upon the cross over night, but was treated as 
 something accursed. The clause is a paren- 
 thesis, and the next verse is to be connected 
 with the first part of this; namely, 'Christ 
 redeemed us from the curse of the law by be- 
 coming a curse for us.' 
 
 14. That the blessing of Abraham 
 might come on the Gentiles through 
 (in) Jesus Christ. Tliat blessing, as before 
 shown, was obtained through faith, and not 
 by obedience to the law— a thought which 
 was now burnt into the minds of the Gala- 
 tians. That we might receive the prom- 
 ise of the Spirit through faith. The 'we' 
 is here comprehensive of all, whether Jews or 
 Gentiles, who have true faith in Christ. For 
 this blessing, the fulfillment of the promise of 
 the Holy Spirit, or the promised Spirit, was 
 bestowed on believing Gentiles as well as be- 
 lieving Jews, and it is scarcely natural to .sup- 
 pose that the apo.stle here thinks of Jews only, 
 especially as he began his argument with the 
 Galatians by appealing to the Spirit's work 
 in them, when and after they believed. "The 
 Holy Spirit is the divine power of that life in 
 which the blessing promised to Abraham con- 
 sists; he founds it, regulates its development, 
 and pledges its completion ; therefore he is 
 called the Spirit of life. (Rom.8-2.)" (Sief- 
 fert. ) 'Through faith'— faith is the organ by 
 which the Spirit is received. From these 
 
44 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; 
 Th.iuyh it he but a man's covenant, yet ij' it be con- 
 Uriuea, no man Uisannulleth, or addeth thereto. 
 
 Hi Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises 
 made, lie saith not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as 
 of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 
 
 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men : 
 Though it be but a man's covenant, yet. when it bath 
 been confirmed, no one maketii it void, or addeth 
 
 16 thereto. Now to Abraham were the promises sijuken, 
 and to his seed. He saith not. And to seeiis, as (.1 
 many; but as of one. And to thy seed, which is 
 
 verses (13, 14) it appears that Paul regarded 
 the viciirious death of Christ as necessary, in 
 order t<» the fultillmentof the promise to A bra- 
 hatn. Human salvation depends upon the death 
 of the lledeemer as a propitiatory sacrifice, and 
 has always depended on that death. 
 
 Paul next proceeds to show — 
 
 5. That the Promise to Abraham Can- 
 not HAVE BEEN Annulled or Changed by 
 THE Law WHICH WAS Given Long After- 
 ward. (15-18.) Compare Kom. 4 : 13, 14, 16. 
 
 15. Brethren, I speak after the manner 
 of men. Observe the cordial address, 'breth- 
 ren.' The feelings of love and kindness are 
 deep iti the apostle's hetirt, and they now find 
 expression. ' After the manner of men ' — that 
 is to say, ' I am about to use an illustration 
 from man's way of dealing with man.' 
 Though it be but a man's covenant, yet 
 if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, 
 or addeth tliereto. There seems to be no 
 absolute necessity for the insertion of 'but' 
 in the first clause, and therefore, as it repre- 
 sents no word in the original, it may be 
 better to omit it, thus: 'A covenant which 
 has been ratified, though a man's, yet no one 
 sets aside or adds to it.' The word 'man's' is 
 emphatic, in contrast with the word 'God's,' 
 understood. That is, when a contract between 
 different men is once ratified or confirmed, it 
 ctmnot be changed by setting it tiside alto- 
 gether, or by adding new stipulations. It is 
 fixed and sacred. 
 
 16. Now to Abraham and his seed 
 Avere the promises made. See Revised 
 Version and Gen. 13:15; 22:17, 18. It 
 is the words 'and his seed' which Paul 
 uses in the following exposition. His ar- 
 gument has been freely criticised as Rab- 
 binical, and by Baur as " plainly arbitrary 
 and incorrect." But it is our duty to hesitate 
 l(mg before charging the apostle with unsound 
 interpretation or doctrine. Very likely his 
 tliought is deeper than we perceive, and wor- 
 thy of admiration, rather than of contempt. 
 Certainly he was correct in looking upon these 
 promises as having more reference to the seed 
 of Abraham than to Abraham himself. Let 
 
 his exposition then receive close attention, and 
 just, if nut generous, treatment! 
 
 He saith not. And to seeds, as of many ; 
 but as of one. And to thy seed, which is 
 Christ. On this verse Dr. Hackett sa^'s: 
 "The apostle does not refer here to any par- 
 ticular passage in the Old Testament which 
 contains these words . . . ; but avails himself 
 of this compendious mode of speaking as a 
 convenient formula for summing up the entire 
 teaching of the Scriptures on this subject. It 
 will be noticed that the singular and the plu- 
 ral differ in this, tiiat 'seed' {anipixa) denotes a 
 unity of genus or class with a plurality of 
 parts (as, for example, the wheat is one, 
 though the kernels, are many), and 'seeds' 
 (o-irep/aaTa) a plurality of classes, as wheat, bar- 
 ley, rye. Compare 'seed' i]^"^]) in 1 Sam. 8: 
 15. It is, therefore, as if Paul had said: 
 "Search the Scriptures from Genesis to Mal- 
 achi ; the promises all run in one strain; they 
 make no mention of a plurality of seeds, such 
 as a natural and spiritual seed, at the same 
 time; they spetik of a single seed only, the 
 believing race, those who are like Abraham in 
 his faith (see Rom. 4 : 12), whether Jews or 
 Gentiles; and as this restriction of the lan- 
 guage to the one seed limits and exhausts the 
 promises as to any share in the blessings of 
 Abraham's justification, there are no promises 
 of this nature for other seeds, such as Abra- 
 ham's natural descendants, merely as such, or 
 Jews by adoption, in virtue of their submis- 
 sion to Jewish rites." It may be observed: 
 
 (1) That the promises made to Abraham were 
 made also to his spiritual 'seed,' the collective 
 noun denoting one body of posterity, not sev- 
 eral bodies. Compare ver. 7, 9, 14, above. 
 
 (2) That Christ was the glory of Abraham's 
 seed, the One whose trust in God was absolute, 
 and in whom pre-eminently all the nations 
 were to be blessed. (3) That Christ is the uni- 
 fying power in all true believers. In him 
 they are 'one' person' («'«). See ver. 28. In- 
 deed, it has been said that Paul was fully jus- 
 tified in regarding all the promises as made to 
 Christ, because Christ was the principle of 
 spiritual life in Abraham and in all who, like 
 
Ch. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 45 
 
 17 And this I say, thai the covenant, that was con- j 17 Christ. Now this I say; A covenant confirmed be- 
 firuieil lieforu of (iod in Christ, the law, which was lour lorchand by Uod, the law, which came four hundred 
 
 hundred and thirty years alter, cannot dibauuul, that and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to 
 
 it should make the promise of none etteet. | 
 
 him, believe. To Christ, dwelling by liis 
 Spirit in the faithful of every age, were the 
 promises really made. Compare the notes of 
 Ellicoit, Lightfoot, Cook, Beet, oi] this pas- 
 sage; also Balentiiie in " Bibliotheca Sacra," 
 188o, page 508, and on the other side of the 
 question Bauer, Meyer, and others. Tiie argu- 
 ment of tile apostle is not without difficulty, 
 but there is no ground for the charge that it is 
 fallacious. Much rather should we suppose 
 that it rests upon a deeper view of the unity of 
 believers with Christ than is cominonly enter- 
 tained. To this fact Paul often refers in lan- 
 guage of startling force. 
 
 17. Now this I say— in other words, ' This 
 is my meaning, the principal thought which I 
 have to express in connection with my remark 
 concerning a man's covenant.' The conjunc- 
 tion ' now' (6ej is resumptive; for the apostle's 
 argument had been interruiited momentarily 
 by the explanation of 'his seed,' in ver. 16. 
 The covenant that was coiifirined before 
 of (by) fciod in Christ, the law, which was 
 (came) four hundred and thirty years 
 after, cannot disannul (or, annul) that it 
 should make the promise of none effect 
 — that is, if human covenants once ratified are 
 sacred and cannot be abrogated or essentially 
 modified afterward, much less can the law, 
 which was given long after the covenant had 
 been established by God himself with Abra- 
 ham, annul the promise contained in that 
 covenant. Whatever else may have been the 
 design of the law, it cannot have been in- 
 tended to set aside, or to modify by new 
 terms, the promise of justification through 
 faith. "The gifts and the calling of God are 
 without repentance." (Rom. ii : 29.) 
 
 But though the bearing of this verse on 
 Paul's argument is very clear, objection has 
 been made to it as containing an erroneous 
 chronological statement. For the words, 
 'which came four hundred and thirty years 
 after,' are said to imply that the whole period, 
 from the first giving of the promise to Abra- 
 ham to the giving of the law, was only four 
 hundred and thirtj' years ; while Exod. 12 : 40, 
 41, where, and where onlj' the same period is 
 mentioned, shows that the sojourn of the Is- 
 
 raelites in Egypt was four hundred and thirty 
 years. Compare the language of Stephen in 
 Acts 7 : t), and Hackett's note on the same. 
 The sojourn in Egypt is there spoken of in 
 round numbers as tour hundred years. But, 
 according to tlae best computation, two hun- 
 dred and fifteen years elapsed between the 
 time when the promise was first given and the 
 time when Jacob and his sons went down into 
 Egypt at the invitation of Joseph ; so that the 
 law came more than six hundred years after 
 the promise. What shall be said of this dis- 
 crepancy ? This, in the first place, that Paul's 
 reasoning is not affected in the slightest de- 
 gree by the length of the period. The law 
 was given long after the promise — whether four 
 hundred and thirty- years or six hundred and 
 forty-five j'ears, more or less, is of no conse- 
 quence. It was enough for him to refer to the 
 period in such terms as would bring it dis- 
 tinctly before the minds of his readers. He 
 is not fixing points of chronology, but recall- 
 ing a well-known period. Accordingly — 
 
 1. Paul may have followed the Septuagint, 
 which contains an addition to the Hebrew 
 text of Exod. 12 : 40, making it read, 'in the 
 land of Eg3'pt and in the land of Cajianii,' 
 and may have done this because the Greek 
 version was suflSciently accurate for his jnir- 
 pose and was generall3' used by the Galatians. 
 His object was not to teach them Biblical 
 chronology, but to remind them of the fact 
 that the law was given long after the promise, 
 and could not be supposed to destroy or change 
 the latter. 
 
 2. He may have followed the Hebrew text, 
 making the dose, instead of the beginning of 
 the patriarchal age, the starting point in his 
 reckoning; for the promise was repeated to 
 Isaac and Jacob, and was, therefore, contem- 
 poraneous with the whole patriarchal period. 
 With this would agree the plural, 'promises,' 
 in ver. 16, if this plural relates to a repeti- 
 tion of essentially the same promise, which is 
 certainly probable. 
 
 3. He may have followed the Septuagint 
 Version, because it was correct in sense. In 
 support of this view, which limits the actual 
 sojourn of Israel in Egypt to two hundred 
 
46 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IIL 
 
 18 Fur if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more 
 of promise: but Goa gave U to Abraiiam by promise, 
 la Wherefore then i,erceth the law? It was added 
 
 iind fifteen years, appeal is made to Exod. 
 0:20 and Num. 2(3:59; for, according to 
 these passages, " Amram, grandson of Levi, 
 marries liis father's sister, Jochebed." And, 
 as it appears probable by a comparison of 
 dates that Levi was born when Jacob was 
 about eight3'-seven, Levi would have been 
 forty-three when he came into Egypt; there 
 he lives ninety-four years. (Kxod. 6:i6.j As- 
 suming, then, that Jochebed was born in the 
 last j^ear of Levi's life, — which is by no means 
 probable, — she must have befen at least two 
 hundred and fifty-six years old when Moses 
 was born, if the sojourn in Egypt be four 
 hundred and thirty years." (Eilicott. ) If 
 there are no missing links in the genealogy 
 of Exod. 6 : 20 and of Num. 26 : 59, the so- 
 journ of the Israelites in Egypt could not 
 liave lasted more than about two hundred and 
 fifteen years But the most obvious interpre- 
 tation of a genealogical table is not always 
 trustworthy; for unimportant names are fre- 
 quently omitted from such a table. On the 
 whole, then, either the first or the second 
 explanation is preferable to the third ; but in 
 no case can the truthfulness of Paul's hm- 
 guiige be impeached. 
 
 ' 18. For if the inheritance be (is) of the 
 laAV, it is no more of promise : but God 
 gave {linth given) it to Abraham by prom- 
 ise. 'For' makes this confirmatory of the 
 preceding words, 'so as to make the promise 
 of none effect.' It would be better, perhaps, 
 in this instance, to insert no article before the 
 word 'law' : 'If the inlieritance is of law, it 
 is no more of promise,' as it was before the 
 law was given. Yet the reference may be to 
 tlie law of Moses. ' Hath given.' The orig- 
 inal word means hath freely given. Once 
 more, therefore, the apostle insists that true 
 heirship is a free gift. It cannot be earned 
 by obedience to the law. Justification is by 
 grace through faith. 
 Tlie apostle now proceeds to point out — 
 0. The Ob.jkct for which the Law was 
 Givkn; Namely, to Awaken in Men a 
 Consciousness of Sin, and thus Lead 
 them to Faith in Christ. (3 : 19-24.) 
 "But if the law have no value as a means 
 
 18 make the promise of none efiect. For if the inherits 
 auce is of the law, it is no more of promise : but God 
 
 19 halh granted it to Abraham by promise. What then 
 is the law V it was adaed because of irausgressions, 
 
 of enabling us to establish a claim to the Di- 
 vine favor, what end, the objector may ask, 
 was it designed to answer? (3:i9.) In reply 
 to this question, the apostle explains the great 
 object of the law to be to prepare men for the 
 reception of the gospel by awakening them to 
 a consciousness of their sins and convincing 
 them of their need of the deliverance from 
 guilt and condemnation, which the redemp- 
 tion of Christ atibrds. (3:i0-22.) We may 
 suppose that while Paul would describe this 
 as the office of law in general, and one, there- 
 fore, which it is adapted still to perform as a 
 means of bringing men to Christ, he means to 
 affirm it here more especially of the Mosaic 
 Economy, that great embodiment of the legal 
 principle which was established to prepare the 
 way for another and better system ; and then, 
 as to its outward forms, its rites and symbols, 
 was destined to come to an end. (3:23-25.) 
 Under this more perfect system which is real- 
 ized in Christ, those who wore only the natural 
 descendants of Abraham become by faith his 
 spiritual seed ; those who were servants, groan- 
 ing under the bondage of sin and the law, 
 become free. (3 : 26-29.) Those who were chil- 
 dren in a state of minority and pupilage, are 
 advanced to tiie dignity of sons and heirs of 
 God, and receive the seal of their adoption as 
 such in the presence of the Spirit of God in 
 their hearts. (4:!-7.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 19. Wherefore then serveth the law? 
 — that is to say. What is the object of the laiv ? 
 The same meaning would be gained by trans- 
 lating the question, ' Why then the law? ' If 
 men cannot be justified by means of it, what 
 good end does it serve, or why was it given? 
 The question which the apostle asks is one that 
 could hardly fail to arise in the minds of the 
 Galatians. Having been taught to accept the 
 Old Testament as a divine revelation, and the 
 law given by Moses as coming really from 
 God, it was impossible for them to believe 
 that it had no holy purpose to serve. And if 
 their teacher had now proved that no man 
 could be saved by obedience to it, they would 
 naturally insist upon his pointing out the 
 reason for its existence, the good end which 
 it was meant to accomplish. The apostle an- 
 
Ch. III.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 47 
 
 because of transgressions, till the seed should come 
 to whom the promise was iiiude; and it was ordiiiuud 
 by angtls in the hand ot a mediator. 
 
 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God 
 is one. • 
 
 till the seed should come to whom the promise hath 
 
 been made; «»»</ (7 »•((.< ordained throuj^h angels by 
 
 20 the hand of a mediator. Isow a mediator is not a 
 
 swcrs : It was added because of {the) 
 transgressions. The word translated 'be- 
 cause of signifies, primarily, for the sake of, 
 and it is best to retain that meaning here. 
 Thayer's "Lexicon" explains the phrase 
 "for tiie sake of tran?gres.sions" as meaning, 
 " to create transgressions — that is, that sins 
 might take on the character of transgressions, 
 and tliereby the consciousness of sin be intensi- 
 fied and the desire for redemption aroused." 
 This interpretation is favored by the language 
 of Paul in Rom. 5 : 20; 7 : 7-9, and by his 
 discussion below. See ver. 22 and 24. It is 
 the office of the law to awaken in men the 
 consciousness of sin, in order that thej' may 
 feel the need of a Saviour; for such is the 
 nature of sinful men, as even heathen writers 
 have confessed, that they are provoked by 
 just restraint, and are sure to covet what is 
 forbidden. Hence, conscious transgression is 
 increased by a clear revelation of the law 
 which it breaks, and tlie soul is made, at the 
 same time, distinctly aware of its perverse 
 self-will and inclination to wrong doing. It 
 is, then, perf(>ctly plain that actual transgres- 
 sion is often occasioned by law ; and therefore 
 the pi-oximate purpose of law may be to mul- 
 tiply transgressions, though, in case of the 
 divine law, its ultimate purpose is certainly to 
 prepare the way for salvation through Christ. 
 This is plainly asserted by the apostle in the 
 sequel. Till the seed should come to 
 whom the promise was (hath been) made 
 (literally, given). According to ver. 16, 
 'the seed' mu.st be Christ; and it is implied 
 tliat the functions of the law were to become 
 far less important after his coming. Indeed, 
 the ritual parts of it were to be annulled and 
 the moral parts assigned to their true place in 
 the New Economy. Hence, all that was strictly 
 dictinctive in the law of Moses was to pass 
 away. And it was ordained by (thrnxgh) 
 angels in (or, />i/) the hand of a mediator. 
 Tlie law was thus given. Bring ordained, 
 or, having been ordained, would be a literal 
 version of the Greek, but less readable En- 
 glish than the one adopted by the Revisers. 
 "By the hand of a mediator"; namely, 
 
 Moses, who received the law and made it 
 known to the people. Thougii nothing is said 
 in the book of Exodus concerning the minis- 
 tration of angels at the giving of the law, 
 their presence is referred to in Deut. 33 : 2, 
 and their service in Acts 7 : 53 and Heb. 2 : 2. 
 But it is useless to conjecture what precisely 
 their service was. This only is imjilied by the 
 argument here, as well as by the course of 
 thougiit in Heb. 2 : 2, that the ministry of 
 angels must be supposed to have diminished, 
 rather than to have increased the intrinsic 
 grandeur of the occasion and the iinportance 
 of the law. A direct communication from 
 God himself would have served to enhance 
 the dignity and sacredne^^s of that which wtis 
 communicated. This will become more evi- 
 dent from our study of the next verse. 
 
 20. Now a mediator is not {a mediator) 
 of one; but God is one. This language is 
 confessedly dark. A great truth is hinted, 
 rather than fully expressed. 'A mediator' 
 (for the definite article in the Greek here 
 marks the noun as generic), it is said in the 
 first clause, does not belong to one; and this 
 implies that he belongs to two, and that a 
 covenant established between two, through 
 the service of a mediator, must, from the 
 nature of the case, depend for its fulfillment 
 upon both. Thus was it, the apostle suggests, 
 in the giving of the law through Moses. The 
 blessing of it was conditioned upon its being 
 honored by the people as well as by God. 
 'But God is one,' and in giving the promise 
 he acted without a mediator, and made the 
 fulfillment of his promise independent of 
 human works. Saj's Sieffert: "The thought 
 of ver. 20 in its historical application is the 
 following : The law is inferior to the i>roinise, 
 because the mediator of it does not belong to 
 God alone, but to him and the people of Israel 
 at the same time, and this can only mean 
 what was intimated in ver. 15-18, that the 
 law, as a covenant relation, mediately estab- 
 lished between God and the people, and de- 
 pending for its validity ujion the conduct of 
 the people, can only represent theconditicmed 
 will of God, but cannot, as the promise given 
 
48 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 21 Is Ihs law then against the promises of God? 
 God forbid: for if there liad been a law given which 
 could have given life, verily righteousness should have 
 been by the law. 
 
 2> But the f>cripture hath concluded all under sin, 
 that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be 
 given to them tliat believe. 
 
 23 But before faiih came, we were kept under the 
 law, sliut up unto the faith which should afterwards 
 be revealed. 
 
 21 medinlor of one; but God is one. Is the law then 
 against the promises of God? God forbid: for il 
 there had been a law given which could make alive, 
 verily righteousness would have been of the law. 
 
 22 Howbeit the scripture shut up all tilings under sin, 
 tliat the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be 
 given to them thai believe. 
 
 23 But before faitli came, we were kept in ward 
 under the law, shut up unto the faith which should 
 
 directly by himself, be an adequate expres- 
 sion of his absolute will, of his eternally valid 
 purpose of salvation." ^ 
 
 21. Is the law then against the promises 
 of God? God forbid! {Let it not be!) 
 The connection between this verse and the 
 preceding may be thus stated: "Having shown 
 that the law is inferior to the promises, must 
 we go a step further and conclude that it 
 works again.st them, that it does anything to 
 prevent their fulfillment or to render them 
 less necessary to human salvation? Let such 
 a thought never enter the mind ! It is incred- 
 ible. For, in the^i^-s^ place, it does not super- 
 sede the promise and render its fulfillment 
 useless, for it cannot give spiritual life, justifi- 
 cation, peace with God. (ver. 21.) And, in the 
 second place, it prepares men for the grace 
 which was promi.sed through Christ by awak- 
 ening in their hearts a sense of sin, and lead- 
 ing them to the Saviour. For if there had 
 been a law given which could have given 
 life {make alive), verily righteousness 
 should {would) have been of the law. In 
 this wjiy, and in this alone, could the law work 
 against the fulfillment of the promises. But, its 
 before proved, it has no power to deliver men 
 from sin and death. Its purpose is far humbler, 
 though exceedingly important; and this pur- 
 posed work of the law the apostle at once pro- 
 ceeds to explain. 
 
 22. But the Scripture hath concluded 
 {shut up) all {things) under sin, that the 
 pr>miseby faith of (m) Jesus Christ might 
 be given to them that believe. By 'the 
 Scripture must be meant the Old Testament, 
 
 and especially the law which it reveals, a law 
 which shows every man to be a transgressor, 
 havmg the guilt of sin resting upon him. The 
 neuter, rendered 'all things,' is evidently used 
 for the sake of emphasis in place of "all men." 
 The object of God in giving the law was to 
 bring men to a clearer and more pungent con- 
 sciousness of sin, by making it take the form 
 of definite transgressions. In other words, it 
 was to make them understand their real inner 
 life, their alienation from himself, and their 
 need of his grace. In the last chiuse, 'the 
 promise' is equivalent to the fulfillment of the 
 promise, and 'by faith in Jesus Christ,' to on 
 condition of faith in Jesus Christ; while the 
 special importance of faith is shown by tlie 
 double reference to it in the words, 'by faith 
 in Jesus Christ,' and in the final expression, 
 'to them that believe.' Looking at salvation 
 from the human side, it depends not upon 
 works of obedience to the law, but upon faith 
 in Jesus Christ, the Saviour of lost men. 
 Even the law itself was intended to compel 
 men to distrust the possibility of justification 
 before God on the ground of obedience, and 
 to trust alone in the mercy of God through 
 the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Thus tlie law is 
 not 'against the promises,' but subservient to 
 them. 
 
 23. But before faith (or, better, the faith) 
 came, we were kept {kept in ward) under 
 the law, shut up unto the faith which 
 should afterwards be revealed. 'The 
 I faith ' here means the system of doctrine of 
 I which faith is a distinguishing feature— the 
 faith system. Compare Jude3: "I was con- 
 
 1 ]Srore than three hundred different explanations of 
 the thought intended by this verse are said to have 
 been given. The statement seems incredible, but human 
 ingenuity is boundless. In the last edition of Meyer's 
 " Commentary," Sieffert reduces ' the weightiest mod- 
 ern explanations' to three classes: 1. Those which find 
 in the first half of the verse a tacit reference to the 
 Mosaic Law, and a proof of its inferiority to the prom- 
 ise in the fact that a Mediator naturally iiuplios tivo 
 parlies. 2. Those which find a tacit reference to the 
 
 Mosaic Law in the first clause, with a proof of its in- 
 feriority to the promise in the fact that a mediator 
 appertains, not to one, but to many. Thus Moses acted 
 for the whole people. 3. Those which are too capri- 
 cious and diverse to be brought under any one point of 
 view. 
 
 Under each of these heads several expositors are 
 named,, and the special features of their interpretations 
 criticised. Sieffcrt's explanation belongs to the first 
 class. 
 
Ch. IIL] 
 
 .GALATIANS. 
 
 4& 
 
 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster In bring 
 us uiuo Christ, that we might be justified by i'aitli. 
 
 'la Hut after iliat faith is come, we are no longer under 
 a schoolmaster. 
 
 •Hi For ye are all the children of God by faith in 
 Christ Jesus. 
 
 24 afterwards be revealed. So that the law is become 
 our tutor to bring us unto Clirlst, tliat we niiglit be 
 
 25 justified by faith. But now that faith is come, we 
 2G are no longer uuder a tutor. Fur ye are all sous of 
 
 strained to write unto you exhorting you to 
 contend earnestly for the faith which was de- 
 livered once for all to the saints," where 'the 
 faitli ' CJinnot easily be under.*tood of snhject- 
 ive trust or belief: it must rather signify the 
 Christian truth delivered to men and received 
 by faith. For a believing spirit was not given 
 once for all to the saints; it was the gospel to 
 be believed which was thus given. So here 
 ' the faith which should afterwards be re- 
 vealed' cannot be subjective faith, but must 
 be the gospel. Compare Acts 6:7; Jude 3. 
 The pronoun 'we' appears to represent the 
 Jewish Christians who, before the gospel 
 came, ^jroclaiming the way of life tlirough 
 ftiith in Christ, were guarded under the law, 
 lest they might escape from its control. 'Shut 
 up unto the faith about to be revealed.' In 
 this clause, 'the faith' evidently means what 
 is believed by Christians, not "the form in 
 which the truth is subjectively appropriated" 
 (Weiss, as quoted by Tiiayer) — that is, in 
 brief, the gospel itself. Says Lightfoot: "The 
 use of . . . faith in these verses (22,23,25) links 
 together its extreme senses, passing from the 
 one to the other: 1. Faith, the subjective state 
 of the Christian; 2. Tlie faith, the gospel, tlie 
 objective teaching, the system of which ' faith' 
 is the leading feature." 
 
 24. Wherefore the law was {hath been) 
 our schoolmaster (tutor) to bring us unto 
 Christ, that we might be justified by 
 faith. The strict supervision and moral train- 
 ing of the'law were a preparation for the free- 
 dom under Christ. Its office was similtir to 
 that of a pedagogiie, or tutor, who has the 
 care and control of children, watching them, 
 restraining them, and often subjecting them 
 to rigid discipline. "Among the Greek and 
 Latin writers the idea of guardianship, and 
 also of strictness and severity, is distinctlj' 
 prominent." (.Ellicott.) 'Unto Christ,' or for 
 Clirist, the preposition marking Christ as the 
 object or end for which the law was a tutor. 
 The law accomplished its pedagogic work by 
 awakening a sense of sin, and thus preparing 
 tho-:e under it to welcome the redemption 
 purchased by Christ. 
 
 25. But after that faith, etc. (or, wow that 
 the faith has come) we are no longer under 
 
 a tutor. If we understand 'the faitii ' to be, 
 as in ver. 23, the message of faith, or the gos- 
 pel, the coming of the gospel is here said by 
 Paul to have changed the religious condition 
 of Jewish believers, so that they were no 
 longer under tutelage, but in a state of free- 
 dom. "Now, when faith is come, the school- 
 master, with his heavy and grievous office, is 
 constrained to give place. . . . The law tcr- 
 rifieth and tormenteth us no more. . . . For 
 Christ, taking upon him our flesh, came once 
 into the world: he abolished the law with all 
 its effects, and delivered from eternal death 
 ail those who receive his benefit by faith. If, 
 therefore, ye look unto Christ, and that which 
 he hath done, there is now no law. . . . And, 
 since the law is gone, we are not kept under 
 the tyranny thereof any more; but we live in 
 joy and safety under Christ, who now sweetly 
 reigneth in us by his Spirit." (Luther.) This, 
 however, according to Luther, is the ideal 
 view. There is another side to the Christian 
 life in its present imperfect state. "Accord- 
 ing to the spirit, we serve with Paul, the 'law 
 of God: but according to the flesh the law of 
 sin.' . . . As long as we live in the flesh, 
 which is not without sin, the law oftentimes 
 returneth and docth his office, in otie more, 
 and in another less, as their faith is strong or 
 weak, and yet not to their destruction, but to 
 tlieir salvation. For this is the exercise of the 
 law in the saints — namely, the continual mor- 
 tification of the flesh, of reason, and of our 
 own strength, and the daily renewing of our 
 inward man." 
 
 Having thus exj)lainod the change in the 
 religious condition of those Jews who had 
 accepted the grace of God in Christ Jesus — 
 
 The Apostle turns to the G-alatiaxs 
 
 AND DeSCRIHES THEIR KeLATION TO GoD 
 
 THROUGH Faith. 
 
 26. For ye are all the children (sons) of 
 God, through faith in Christ Jesus— liter- 
 ally, 'through the (iiith in Christ Jesus,' the 
 faith which has been so often referred to in 
 this discussion, and whichi has in Jesus Christ 
 
50 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. III. 
 
 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into 
 Clirist have put on Christ. 
 
 28 There is neiiher Jew nor Greek, there is neither 
 bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for 
 ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 
 
 29 And if ye be. Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, 
 and heirs according to the promise. 
 
 27 God, through fiith, in Christ Jesus. For as many 
 of you as were baptized into Christ did put on 
 
 28 Christ. There can be neiiher Jew nor Greek, there 
 can be neithiT bond nor free, there can be no male 
 and female : for ye all are one 7iian in <;hrist Jesus. 
 
 29 And if ye are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, 
 heirs according to promise. 
 
 its object and resting place. "He saith not, 
 ye are the children of God because ye are 
 circumcised, because ye have heard the law 
 and have done the works thereof (as the Jews 
 do imagine and the false apostles teach), but 
 by faith in Jesus Christ. . . . What tongue, 
 eith(!r of men or angels, can sulBcientiy extol 
 and magnify the great mercy of God toward 
 us, that we, who are miserable siimers, and by 
 nature the children of wrath, should be called 
 to his grace and glory, to be made the children 
 and heirs of God, fellow-heirs with the Son of 
 God, and lords over heaven and earth, and 
 that by means of our faith only which is in 
 Christ Jesus." (Luther.) 
 
 27. For as many of you as have been 
 (we7-e) baptized into Christ have (did) put 
 on Christ. Tor' shows that this verse was 
 written to confirm the preceding statement, to 
 show that all believers in Christ, the Son of 
 God, are so united with him as to be, in con- 
 sequence of that union, also themselves sons 
 of God. To express this, baptism must have 
 represented the beginning of true faith in the 
 soul. And the words, ' did put on Christ,' 
 describe the act of baptism as their own act. 
 They do not agree with the idea that baptism 
 was intended to produce failh in any one who 
 did not wish to be a servant of Christ, or to 
 implant the germ of it in infants. All who 
 were baptized did by that act avowedly put 
 on Christ, did ritually and solemnly and pub- 
 licly confess their having entered upon a new 
 spiritual life of faith in the Son of God. Elli- 
 cott explains ' into Christ ' as meaning, in this 
 place, "into communion with him, and in- 
 corporation in his mystical body." He also 
 says that "from the instances which Wettstein 
 has collected on Kom. 13, 14, it would appear 
 that 'to put on one' is a strong expression, 
 
 denoting the complete assumption of the na- 
 ture, etc., of anotner." See Col. 3 : 9, 10. 
 
 28. There is (can he) neither Jew nor 
 Greek, there is {can be) neither bond nor 
 free, there is {can be) neither male nor 
 female : for ye all are one {man) in 
 Christ Jesus. See Revised Version. Light- 
 foot's paraphrase is excellent: "In Christ ye 
 are all sons, all free. Every barrier is swept 
 away. No special claims, no special liabilities 
 exi.stin him; none cam exist. The conventional 
 distinctions of religious caste or of social rank, 
 even the natural distinction of sex, are ban- 
 ished hence. One heart beats in all: one mind 
 guides all: one life is lived by all: ye are all 
 ojie man, for ye are members of Christ." The 
 unity here affirmed relates to spiritual life and 
 standing before God. It is, therefore, per- 
 fectly consistent with diversity of offices, du- 
 ties, gifts — whether in the church or in the 
 world. See the apostle's discussion in 1 Cor- 
 inthians chapters 12 and 14. There is — or, 
 can be (eVi). For the origin and meaning of 
 the Greek word, see Thayer's "New Testa- 
 ment Lexicon," sub voce; "Winer's "New 
 Testament Grammar," page 80; and EUicott, 
 Lightfoot, and others on this passage. Com- 
 pare Col. 8 : 11 and James 1 : 17, where the 
 same word occurs. Thayer defines it, "is in, 
 is among, is present, has place" for the New 
 Testament; but says that in profane authors 
 it often signifies '^ can be, is possible, is law- 
 ful." Lightfoot explains its meaning here as 
 " there is no room for, place for." 
 
 29. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye 
 Abraham's seed, and heirs according to 
 the promise— that is, if you belong to the 
 person of Christ, then, being one with him, 
 the Seed to whom the promise was given, are 
 ye Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise. 
 
Ch. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 51 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 lyOW I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, 
 l\ tliffereth nothing from a servanl, though he be 
 lord of all ; 
 
 2 But is under tutors and gjveruors until the time 
 appointed of the faiher. 
 
 A Even So we, wlieu we were children, were in bond- 
 age under the elements of the world: 
 
 1 But I say that so long as the heir is a child, he 
 ditTereth nothing from a bondservant, though he is 
 
 2 lord of all; but is under guardians and stewards 
 
 3 until the term appointed of the father. So we also, 
 when we were children, were held in bondage under 
 
 Cli. 4 : The Apostle Describes the Re- 
 lation OF Christians to God as that of 
 Sons and Heirs, Instead of Minors or 
 Bondservants. (1-7.) — Dr. Hackett, as we 
 have seen (s : is), understands these verses to 
 tench tliat "those who were children in a state 
 of minority and pupihige, are advanced to the 
 dignity of sons and heirs of God, and receive 
 the seal of their adoption as such in the 
 presence of the Spirit of God in their hearts." 
 
 1. Now I say, Thtit tlie heir, as long as 
 he is a child, diflfereth nothing from a 
 servant, though he be lord of all. Com- 
 pare the Revised Version, which is more 
 exact. Tiie apostle now explains his conclu- 
 sion that " if we are Christ's, then are we . . . 
 heirs according to promise." (3:29.) The 
 word translated 'child' is often applied to 
 one who is but an infant, not having learned 
 to speak ; but it is also applied to one who is 
 older, and here to one who has not reached 
 his majoritj-, so as to be able to speak for him- 
 self in business atfairs. The English word 
 'infant' lias by derivation the same primary 
 sense, and in common use it signifies a babe, 
 but in legal documents it often signifies a 
 minor. 'Differeth nothing,' or in no respect, 
 'from a bondservant' — that is, his legal status 
 is substantially that of a slave. He is subject 
 to those who are placed over him by his 
 father. This is assumed to be customary by 
 the language of the verse, and there is no 
 reason to call in question the correctness of 
 this assumption. Doubtless there were points 
 of diflference between the ordinary' treatment 
 of minors and the ordinary treatment of 
 slaves, but both were under the legal control 
 of others. 'Though he be lord of all.' By 
 nature and in his own right he is lord, while 
 his present condition is like that of a servant. 
 2. But is under tutors and governors 
 (better, overseers and steioards) until the 
 time (Revised Version, term) appointed of 
 the father. The distinction between 'over- 
 seers ' and ' stewards ' {€itirp6nov<; koI oixovonou?) ap- 
 
 pears to be this — that the duties of the latter were 
 commonly restricted to the care of the house- 
 hold, while the duties of the former were not 
 thus restricted, but might include the care 
 and training of children. ' Until the time 
 appointed by the father.' The Greek (t^« 
 7rpo9e<7-Mia«) means the'before-appolnted doxy or 
 hour, the word day (ij/nepa), or hour (ipo) 
 being understood. Yet the expression 'the 
 term appointed' is sufficiently accurate, be- 
 cause the day or hour fixed was the terminus 
 of a period. It is said that among the He- 
 brews, Greeks, and Romans, the age at which 
 children ceased to be minors was fixed by law 
 or custom, so that a father had nothing to do 
 with that matter in making his last will and 
 testament. He could select the guardians for 
 his children, but could not appoi'nt the day 
 when the children should become of age. 
 Some interpreters have supposed that a differ- 
 ent custom prevailed in Galatia, "but this 
 view," says Lightfoot, "seems to rest on a 
 mistaken interpretation of a passage of Gains 
 — I, I 55." But is there an_v need of sui)i>os- 
 ing that Paul has in mind the case of an heir 
 whose father is dead? While both were liv- 
 ing the father had supreme authority over the 
 son, and often committed the son to the care 
 of overseers, and the management of his es- 
 tate to stewards. See Matt. 21 : 38 ; Luke 
 16 : 31. It is better, then, to assume that the 
 apostle had in view the condition of children 
 whose father was still alive. 
 
 3. Even so we, when we Avere children, 
 were in bondage under the elements 
 (rudbnents) of the world. Does the 'we' 
 refer to all Christians, whether Jews or Gen- 
 tiles by birth, or to Jewish Christians alone? 
 Lightfoot, Beet, Boise, and Sieffert hold that 
 it means all Christians, especially in view of 
 the following context, but ElHcott thinks that 
 the primary reference is to converted Jews, as 
 the previous context suggests, while there is a 
 secondary reference to converted Gentiles, as 
 the following verses show. Certainty on this 
 
52 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV. 
 
 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God 
 sent lorlh liis Son, made of a woman, made under the 
 law, 
 
 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we 
 might receive the adoption of sons. 
 
 4 the 1 rudiments of the world: Imt when the fulness 
 of the time came, God sent forth his ."^on, horn of a 
 
 5 woman, born under the law, that he might redeem 
 them that were under the law, that we might re- 
 
 2 Or, elements. 
 
 pjint is beyond our reach, but we incline to 
 the opinion that Paul has in mind Christians 
 without regard to nationality. This is favored 
 by the last part of the verse, 'were held in 
 bondage under the rudiments of the world.' 
 "What, then, is meant by 'the rudiments of the 
 world ' (tix aroixela ToD Kotrfj-ov) ? The word trans- 
 lated rudiments signifies: (1) The elements of 
 speech, the letters of the alphabet. (2) The 
 elements, or a, b, c, of any art, science, disci- 
 pline, or religion. See Heb. 5: 12, 13; Gal. 
 4:9; Col. 2 : 8, 20. (3) The elements of the 
 physical universe. (2 Peter 3 : 10, 12.) (4) The 
 heavenly bodies. The word is used in only 
 the second and third senses by New Testament 
 writers. Here it must denote the crude, ele- 
 mentary ideas of religion which were known 
 to the heathen as well as to the Jews, which 
 were in fact the possession of the world of 
 mankind, and Avhich were embodied in ritual 
 acts testifying of sin, but bringing no peace to 
 conscience. The burdensome rites of Juda- 
 ism, as they were taught and practiced by 
 many in Paul's day, were just as powerless 
 before God as were the superstitious forms of 
 idolatry. Neither of them brought the free- 
 dom of sonship to God. Both of them kept. 
 the souls of their devotees in bondage and 
 fear. And this was the condition of all who 
 clung to mere legalism before the advent of 
 Christ. 
 
 4. But Avhen the fulness of the time 
 was come (or, cayne). This language answers 
 to 'the time appointed by the father' in ver. 
 2, and according to Meyer signifies "the mo- 
 ment through which the period of time wliicih 
 was to pass before the Saviour came was made 
 full." But why so long a period was fixed by 
 the wisdom of God before the advent of his 
 Son, no one has been able to explain. Some 
 have thought it was precisely adapted to the 
 moral or religious preparation which the 
 world, and especially the chosen people, 
 needed for the comingof Christ. Others have 
 thought that it was fixed at the hour "when 
 human nature, having gone through every 
 form of wickedness, Wtis in need of healing." 
 Theophylact says that Christ came "in the 
 
 hour of supremest need"; and Chrysostom, 
 that when "men were specially near destruc- 
 tion, then they were saved." No reverent 
 Christian can doubt that he came at the best 
 moment possible. But the apostle simply 
 aflBrms that when the pre-Messianic period 
 was completed, God sent forth his Son, 
 made (horn) of a woman, made {born) 
 under the law. ' Forth ' — that is, away from 
 his presence, or, more accurately, from 'the 
 glory which he had with the Father before 
 the world was.' (John 17 : 5; compare 1 : 1 
 and 1 John 1:2.) The apostle starts with the 
 incarnation, though his words may embrace 
 Christ's appearance among men. Manj' in- 
 terpreters look upon this passage as one of a 
 few in the New Testament which teach the 
 proper Sonship of the Word (Ad-yos) to the 
 Father before the incarnation. This may 
 have been in the apostle's mind, but I do not 
 see that it tnust have been. Could he not 
 have said, " God sent forth Jesus Christ, born 
 of a woman, born under the law," though he 
 did not intend to say that Jesus Chri.st as such 
 was pre-existent? And if so, could he not 
 write, 'God sent forth his Son, born of a 
 wonian, born under the law,' though he did 
 not intend to say that the Word was, strictly 
 speaking, Son before the incarnation ? Com- 
 pare his language in Phil. 2 : 6, where the pro- 
 noun " who," in the clause " who being in the 
 form of God," represents "Jesus Clirist," the 
 only possible antecedent. As Jesus Christ, by 
 virtue of his higher nature, existed, before liis 
 humiliation, in the form of God, so God's 
 Son, the san.e Jesus Christ, by virtue of his 
 higher nature, was sent forth from glory, etc. 
 
 There is surely nothing absurd in this inter- 
 pretation. The clauses, 'born of a woman, 
 born under the law,' describe certain grctit 
 features of the incarnation. The former calls 
 attention to his genuine humanity. He was a 
 veritable man. His human nature was derived 
 from the common stock. He partook with his 
 brethren of flesh and blood. But he was also 
 a Jew, ' born under the law ' and subject to all 
 its requirements. 
 
 5. To redeem {that he anight redeem) 
 
Cii. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 G And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the 
 Spirit of his Sun into your hearts, crying, Abba, 
 i-'ather^ 
 
 7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a sou ; 
 and if a sou, then an heir of God through Christ. 
 
 6 ceive the adoption of sons. And because ye are 
 sons, (Jod sent fortli the f^pirit of his Sou into our 
 
 7 hearts, crying, Aliba, Fallier. So that thou art no 
 longer a bondservant, but a son ; and if a sou, t.ieu 
 an heir through God. 
 
 them that were under the law, that we 
 might receive the adoption of sons. 
 
 'Them that were uiuiur the law' — literally, 
 'those under law,' meaning, doubtless, the law 
 of Moses. Yet the Jewish law was not differ- 
 ent in principle from any other revelation of 
 God's law. All men are naturally under law, 
 and by it are condemned as transgressors, un- 
 less thej' have been ransomed by the blood of 
 Clirist. For all are guilty of doing what they 
 knew to be wrong, and when their consciences 
 are awake, if at no other time, they see them- 
 selves to be under condemnation. Hence, 
 their frantic efforts to appease imaginary gods, 
 and the hopelessness with which they look 
 into the future. Seeing no prospect of deliv- 
 erance from the bondage and curse of the law, 
 as it is revealed to them, they long for annihi- 
 lation, or, at least, for the rest of existence 
 without feeling. In the last clause, 'that we 
 might receive tlie adoption of sons,' the 'we' 
 embraces all Christians, whether Jews or Gen- 
 tiles. And adoption is the divine act of assign- 
 ing to believers in Christ the position and 
 privileges of sons. " It is a favorite thought 
 with the apostle that the Christian is the 
 adopted son of God. He is not merely a pros- 
 elyte brought from another nation to share the 
 privileges of the Jewish people; he is made a 
 member of the family of Christ. The custom 
 of adoption was familiar both to the Greek 
 and the Roman law, and is used by the apos- 
 tle, wiio was the Roman citizen of a Greek 
 city, like some other legal notions (Eom. 7: i : GmI. 
 3:ii;*:i) to c.xpress the relations of God and 
 man." (Jowett.) "Whether the preposition in 
 the Greek word for 'that we might receive' 
 (iiroAa/Sujiei') signifies that the adoption of sons 
 was looked upon by Paul as a good received 
 in fuliiliment of a promise, or as a good re- 
 ceived back again after being lost, or merely 
 as a good received from another, cannot easily 
 be decided ; but the last explanation is open to 
 fewer objections than either of the preceding. 
 
 For the adoption of sons is not here spoken of 
 as promised, and it includes far more than 
 Adam had before the fall. See EUicott and 
 Meyer, and compare the use of the same verb 
 in Luke 16 : 25. ^ 
 
 6. And because ye are sons, God hath 
 sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your 
 hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Union with 
 Christ, sonsiiip to God, and inworking of the 
 Holy Spirit are inseparable blessings, and the 
 apostle here points out their logical order and 
 relation. The Galatians hud been endued 
 with the Holy Spirit (3 : ■^. seq.), because they 
 were sons of God by adoption. It is this 
 Spirit that cries from their hearts through 
 their lips, 'Abba, Father.' In other words, it 
 is this Spirit who gives them filial love and 
 confidence, so that they call upon God as their 
 Father in heaven. Observe, however, that 
 the language of Paul recognizes the Holy 
 Spirit as pertaining to 'his Son,' Jesus Christ. 
 Compare John 15 : 26; 16 : 7; Rom. 8:9; 
 Phil. 1 : 19; Acts 17 : 7; 1 Peter 1 : 10, 11; 2 
 Cor. 3 : 17, 18. Hence the filmque, the 'pro-, 
 ceeding' of the Holy Spirit from the Son, as 
 well as from the Father, is manifestl}' the 
 teacliing of the divine word. But the proces- 
 sion spoken of or imj)lied in these passages 
 cannot properly be understood of an eternal 
 process within the Trinity, but must be re- 
 ferred to the action of the Spirit in renewing 
 and .sanctifying men, or in revealing to them 
 religious truth. 
 
 7. Wherefore (or, .so thnf) thou art no 
 more {longer) a servant, bnt a son ; and 
 if a son, then (or, a/.so)an heir of {fJu-ongk) 
 God. By changing the address from 'ye' to 
 'thou,' Paul renders his words more personal 
 and impressive. For 'thou' means every sep- 
 arate Christian among the Galatians. In the 
 last clause of ver. 5 it is 'we' ; in ver. 6 it is 
 'ye'; and now in ver. 7 it is 'thou.' Notice 
 the reiteration and expansion of the saniv 
 thought in Rom. 8: 14-17; "For as many as 
 
 'The compound verb aiTo\.ai).fia.veiv occurs in the fol- 
 lowing pa.«sages : Luke 15 : 27 -, 16 : 25 ; 18 : 30 ; 23 : 41 ; 
 Rom. 1 : '27; Col. .'i : 24; 2 John 8, And it seems to me 
 that the word signifies to lecehe from some jjcrson or 
 
 place, without any implication in Itself that what is re- 
 ceived is pay or punishment, or had been promised or 
 posscs.sed liefore. These tilings depend on the context, 
 not on the verb. 
 
54 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV 
 
 8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did ser- 
 vice unto them which by nature are no gods. 
 
 y But now, after tliat ye have known God, or ratlier 
 are known ol' Uod, how turn ye again to the weak and 
 beggarly elements, whereunto'ye desire again to be in 
 bondage? 
 
 8 Howbeit at that time, not knowing God, ye were 
 
 9 in bondage to them that by nature are no gods : but 
 now ilial ye have come lo know God, or rather to be 
 known of God, how turn yo back again to the weak 
 and beggarly ' rudiments, whereuuto ye desire to 
 
 1 Or, elemenU, 
 
 are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons 
 of God. For ye received not the spirit of 
 bondage again to fear; but ye have received 
 the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, 
 Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with 
 our spirit, that we are children of God: and 
 if children, then heirs; heirs of God and joint- 
 heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with 
 him, that we may be «lso glorified together 
 {ivitk him)." AVhat more is it possible for 
 Christians to have? 
 
 But why does the apostle say (for this is the 
 correct reading), 'an \\e\v through God,' when 
 we miglit rather expect him to say 'an heir of 
 God' ? Probably because he was thinking at 
 this moment of God as the one by whom every 
 heir to himself, save Christ, had been adopted, 
 because he was thinking more of the privilege 
 and glory of being made a son by God's own 
 gracious act than of the blessedness that would 
 result from the relation thus established. To 
 think of either is enough to break the heart 
 ■with joy. 
 
 The Folly of the Galatians in Re- 
 ttjrning to the bondage of legalism. 
 (8-11.) — "In view of this superiority of the 
 Christian Dispensation to the Jewish, Paul 
 then remonstrates with the Galatians on their 
 folly and ingratitude in turning back to the 
 beggarly elements of the past. (4:8-ii.) He 
 adds his most earnest entreaty that they would 
 return and trust again with him in Christ ; he 
 strengthens this appeal by a touching allusion 
 to their former affection for him, and distinctly 
 apprises them that in becoming alienated from 
 him they had been made the dupes of artful 
 men, whose pretended zeal for the law origi- 
 nated in a selfish regard for their own ease and 
 reputation. (4:12.20.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 8. Howbeit then, when ye knew not 
 
 God, ye did service unto them which by 
 nature are no gods. See the Revised Ver- 
 sion. 'Did service' should be rendered, 'did 
 bondservice,' or ' were in bondage,' for this is 
 the proper meaning of the word, and besides 
 it carries forward the representation of bond- 
 age emphasized in the preceding cotitext. It 
 properly characterizes the service. From this 
 verse it may be inferred that nearly all the 
 Galatian Christians had been idolaters. In- 
 deed, the whole Epistle makes upon one the 
 impression that its readers were converts from 
 heathenism. Tliey had been in bondage to 
 those that by nature were not gods, though 
 they were called gods and were served witii 
 fear. The word 'howbeit' is a somewhat vague 
 word, used in this place to avoid the employ- 
 ment of 'but' in two successive clauses. The 
 original (iAXa) is, however, best represented by 
 the ordinary equivalent 'but.' 
 
 9. But now, after that ye have known 
 God, or rather are known of God. The 
 word translated 'have known' differs from 
 that translated 'knew' in ver. 8, and may be 
 rendered, 'have come to know' or 'have rec- 
 ognized." See Revised Version. 1 
 
 'Or rather are known of God' — that is, by 
 God. This clause appears to have been in- 
 serted by the apostle, lest perchance the Gala- 
 tians might assign undue importance to their 
 recognition and knowledge of God, while 
 God's recognition of them was infinitely more 
 important, as well as more perfect. Compare 
 1 Cor. 8 : '2 and 13 : 12. Or if the idea of ' ap- 
 probation ' is involved in the word as here 
 used, how instantly does God's knowledge of 
 them fill the mind and expel every thought of 
 their knowledge of him! The latter is the 
 more probable explanation. How turn ye 
 again to the weak and beggarly elements. 
 
 iThe note of Lightfoot on the two words is instruct- 
 ive. " Thus yivuiOKeiv will be used in preference to 
 ctScfat : 1. Where there is reference to some earlier 
 state of ignorance, or to some prior facts on which the 
 knowledge is based. 2. Where the ideas of ' thorough- 
 DPSs, familiarity,' or of 'approbation,' are involved: 
 
 these ideas arising out of the stress which ■yii'w<ric€i»> 
 lays on iheprocfsi of reception. Both words occur very 
 frequently in the First Epistle of St. John, and a com- 
 parison of the passages where they are used brings out 
 this distinction of meaning clearly." 
 
Ch. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 00 
 
 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and 
 years. 
 
 11 I aiu afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you 
 labour ill vuiii. 
 
 12 lirelhruii, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as 
 ye are : ye have not injured me at all. 
 
 10 be in bondage over again ? Ye observe days, and 
 
 11 months, and seasons, and years. I am afraid of you, 
 lest by any means 1 have bestowed latjour upon you 
 iu vaiu. 
 
 12 I beseech you, bretliren, become as I am, for I also 
 
 whereunto ye desire again to be in bond- 
 
 age ? The Revised Version reuds ' back 
 again,' instead of 'again,' in the first clause of 
 tills question. The apostle here speaks as if 
 the process were already begun, as if they 
 were now perpetrating the folly described by 
 hiin. 'The elements' of religion possessed by 
 the Galutians before their conversion are char- 
 acterized as 'weak,' because they had no 
 power to deliver men from condemnation; 
 and 'beggarly' or 'poor,' because they 
 utterly failed to enrich the soul with any real 
 good. And in neither of these respects would 
 the legal observances of Judaism prove to be 
 any better than those of paganism. Tlie Greek 
 words employed {ird.\iv avuiBei') are inadequately 
 rendered by 'again' in the Common Version. 
 'Over again' in the Revised Version is an 
 improvement, especially if Lightfoot is correct 
 in pronouncing them "a strong expression to 
 describe the completeness of their relapse." 
 But it is better to regard the second word 
 (ava)9ei') as signif^'ing 'afresh' or 'anew,' and 
 the two words as meaning that their proposed 
 form of legal religion was a fresh start on an 
 old way, a resumption de novo of a religious 
 life which they had known and relinquished. 
 Compare the use of the second word (ayioBev) 
 in John 3 : 3. 
 
 10. Ye observe days, and months, and 
 times (seasons), and years. This may be 
 read as a question : " Days do ye scrupulously 
 observe and months, and seasons, and years?" 
 But with that change the meaning would re- 
 main essentially the same. The Galatians 
 seem to have begun to keep some of the Jew- 
 ish sacred times, perhaps the Jewish Sabbath, 
 thus committing themselves in principle to 
 the keeping of all the rest. The word 'days' 
 probably refers to the weekly sabbaths and 
 other set days observed by the Jews. See 
 Col. 3 : 16 and Rom. 14 : 5, seq. Tliere is no 
 ground for believing that Paul embraced the 
 Lord's Day in this category. The word 
 'months' is commonly supposed to signify in 
 this place neio moons — that is, the first day of 
 every month. See Num. 10 : 10; '28 : 11 ; Isa. 
 1 : 13; Hosea 2: 11 ; 1 Chron. 23 : 31 ; Ts. 81 : 3. 
 
 'Seasons' must mean the periods allotted to 
 the annual festivals, such as the Passover, the 
 Pentecost, the Feast of the Ingathering, etc. ; 
 and 'years,' tiie seventh sabbatic year, to- 
 gether with the fiftieth or Jubilee. Meyer 
 and Sieti'ert maintain the opinion that 'months' 
 does not signify new moons, but rather peri- 
 ods of a full month, and that certain months 
 of every year were esteemed specially sacred. 
 This, however, is less probable than the view 
 given above. For if any months were spe- 
 cially sacred, it must have been because of the 
 religious festivals observed in them, and these 
 festivals are doubtless meant by the word 
 'seasons.' To suppose them twice mentioned 
 is unnatural. Dr. Boise takes the enumera- 
 tion to be of a general nature, thus: "Days — 
 years: a general expression (which we sliould 
 not attempt to define too particularly) with 
 reference to the Jewish observance of times 
 iind seasons." 
 
 11. I am afraid of you, lest I have be- 
 stowed upon you labour in vain. Revised 
 Version: lest by nnij means. This fear reveals 
 the danger to which they were exposed and 
 the deep interest which the apostle felt in their 
 welfare. They were on the point of turning 
 away from the true and full gospel which they 
 had received, to a religion of works that would 
 prove their ruin. Should they really do what 
 they were solicited to do, it would be a renun- 
 ciation of confidence in Christ as their Saviour, 
 and a virtual rejection of the gospel. 
 
 Pkbsoxal Appeal to the Galatians. 
 (12-20.) See Hackett's analysis before ver. 8, 
 seq. 
 
 12. Brethren, I beseech you, be as I 
 am ; for I am as ye are. Says Dr. 
 Hackett: "A more correct translation . . . 
 would be: ' Become as I am. for I also have 
 become as ye are, brethren, I beseech you.' 
 The passage has been treated as needlessly ob- 
 scure. We have the key which unlocks the 
 meaning in 1 Cor. 9:20,21. "Unto the Jews," 
 Paul says there, "I became as a Jew, that I 
 might gain the Jews; ... to them that are 
 without law (I became) as without law. that 
 I might gain them that are without law" 
 
56 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV. 
 
 13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I 
 preaclied tht; gospel unto jou at tlie first. 
 
 13 avi hucomp as ye are. Ye did me no wrong : but ye 
 know that because of an infirmity ot ihe flesh I 
 
 (ifdjuous). Meyer's translation fulfills every 
 linguistic and logiciil condition of the sentence, 
 and represents the view of the best scholars: 
 'Werdet wieich; denn audi ich bin vvie ihr 
 geworden.' " Become ye as I ; for I also have 
 become as ye." We merely repeat ' have be- 
 come' {iyevoixriv} in the sccond clause from be- 
 come (yicco-fle) in the first, and supply the sub- 
 stantive verb. For 'I also' (xiyio), equivalent 
 to / 071 tny part, compare 1 Cor. 11 : 1. The 
 sense, then, is : " Become in your relinquish- 
 ment of Jewish rites as I am in that respect; 
 for I also, who am a Jew, and consequently 
 attached to such rites by every tie of natural 
 sympathy, have forsaken them, and become as 
 you are — that is, have placed myself upon the 
 Gentile ground, which is that of the non-ob- 
 servance of the Jewish Law. It is but reason- 
 able, therefore, that I should ask you (Seo^iai 
 iiaMi/) to concur with me, and thus be simply 
 true to your own natural position, when I, 
 against every bias of birth and education, 
 have cast aside the forms of Judaism, and 
 assimilated to the Gentiles." The other possi- 
 ble explanation would be: "Become as I am, 
 because I also was (once) as ye are (in your 
 present status) — that is, I was under the Jew- 
 ish Law and was trusting in obedience to it 
 for justification beff)re God, as you now pro- 
 pose to do." But this does not suit the con- 
 nection as well as the first explanation. Ye 
 have not injured me at all. Revised Ver- 
 sion : Ye did me no wrong. Paul, however 
 grieved with their distrust of his Lord, had no 
 reason to complain of any wrong done to him- 
 self Far from it. He remembered with joy 
 the reception which they gave to him and to his 
 message wlien he was first among them. They 
 had welcomed him with an open and cordial 
 spirit, with impulsive generosity and confi- 
 dence. 
 
 13. Ye know how through infirmity of 
 the flesh I preached the gospel unto you 
 at the first. The Revised Version is more 
 accurate: But ye know that because of an in- 
 jirmity of the fJesh I preached the gospel unto 
 you the first time. Literally: 'the former 
 time,' for he had preached among them at two 
 different times, as we haveseen. (i:9) This 
 verse preserves to us a singularly interesting 
 fact respecting the apostle's ministry. Preach- 
 
 ing the gospel in Galatia was not included in 
 the plan for his second missionary journey. 
 But owing to a bodily disease, which is proba- 
 bly alluded to in 2 Cor. 12 : 7, seq., he was 
 constrained to remain for a time in that prov- 
 ince where he preached tiie gospel with great 
 success. AVe find it impossible to identify 
 his 'infirmity of the flesh' with any particu- 
 lar form of disease, though it was evidently 
 painful and humiliating. Perhaps it was all 
 the more so, because he could often obtain 
 mii'aculous healing for others, though not, in 
 this case, for himself. ''The thorn in the 
 flesh, a messenger of Satan," was not removed, 
 even at his thrice-repeated prayer, but such 
 grace was given him that 'his strength was 
 made perfect in weakness,' and he was able 
 'to glory in his infirmities.' It is not indeed 
 demonstrable that he refers to the same in- 
 firmity here and in 2 Cor. 12, but it seems ex- 
 ceedingly probable. The two letters were 
 written about the same time, and the language 
 used in both might naturally be applied to one 
 and the same disease. 
 
 A few interpreters have urged with much 
 zeal the opinion that it was a disease affecting 
 the eyes, and have appealed to the blindness 
 produced by the light from heaven at his con- 
 version (Acts9:3, 8) as favorable to this opinion. 
 But that blindness, however caused, was healed 
 by miracle (Acts9: n, is), and it is scarcely prob- 
 able that thisdivinecure was imperfect. They 
 have also discovered in Acts 13 : 9 ; 14 : 9 ; 21 : 3 
 a slight indication of imperfect sight, though 
 the same expression is frequently used of those 
 who are not presumed to have weak eyes or a 
 dim sight (see Luke 4: 20; 22:5G; Acts 1:10; 
 3:4; 6:15; 7:55; 10:4; 11:6), and cannot 
 be relied upon as evidence that the apostle's 
 vision was impaired. Reference has also been 
 made in support of this hj'pothesis to Gsil. 
 4:15; 6:11, on the ground that ophthalmia 
 would account for what is said in both places; 
 but it will appear upon examination that there 
 is no need of this hypothesis to account for the 
 language of eitheT passage. Hence the argu- 
 ments in support of the conjecture that Paul's 
 " thorn in the flesh " was a painful inflamma- 
 tion and weakness of eyes "seem to melt 
 away under the light of careful examination." 
 (Lightfoot.) 
 
Ch. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 57 
 
 14 Aud uiy tciuptation which was in my flesh ye de- 14 preueht-d the go.-.|)el iinio you the ' tirst time: and 
 
 Bpised nut, nor rejected ; but received me aa au angel 
 o:' God, errn as Christ Jesus. 
 
 15 W here is then (lie blessedness ye spake of? for I hear 
 you record, that, if it had hem po>silile, ye would have 
 plucked out your own eyes, and have given theiu to uie. 
 
 11) Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell 
 you the truth? 
 
 that which wan a tiiuptalion to you in my llesh ye 
 despised nol, nor ^leji^eled; but nceived me as an 
 
 15 angel of (iod, «(v-h as Christ Jesus. Where then is 
 that gratulation ^of yourselves? for 1 bear you wit- 
 ness, that, if possible, ye would have piucued out 
 
 16 your eyes and given them to me. iSo then am 1 be- 
 
 1 Ot. former 'I Gr. $pat out 3 Or, of yours. 
 
 The conjecture of Lightfoot, supported by a 
 parallel account coiiccriiiiig a malady with 
 which Alfred the Great was afflicted, ''that it 
 was of the nature of epilepsy," must not be 
 accepted as more than a conjecture, though it 
 is very ingeniously defended. See note on 
 "St. Paul's Infirmity in the Flesh,'' p. 169, seq. 
 
 14. And my temptation whicli was in 
 my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected. 
 Revised Version is better: And that loJdch 
 was a tem-ptation to you in, my flesh, ye de. 
 spised not, nor rejected. A more literal ren- 
 dering would be: ' Your trial in iny flesh ye 
 despised not, nor spurned ' (or loathed). The 
 reading 'yo?<r trial' is much better supported 
 than 'my trial.' 1 So the apostle's disease ap- 
 pears to have been of such a nature as to test 
 their candor and regard for him, of such a 
 nature that he feared it would destroy confi- 
 dence and excite disgust. Yet it did not. 
 But received me as an angel of God, even 
 as Christ Jesns. That is, they listened to 
 him as if he were a messenger of God to them, 
 as if he were Christ Jesus himself. lie could 
 not have been received with more respect; 
 tliey welcomed his message as divine and him- 
 self as Ciirist's ambassador to them. The 
 apostle recalls their treatment of himself and 
 of his 'good news' with the most cordial grat- 
 itude. This is characteristic of him, and in 
 this he is an example whicli every Christian 
 should seek to follow. 
 
 15. Where is then the blessedness ye 
 spake of? The text of this clause is uncer- 
 tain. If we adhere to the best supported read- 
 ing, the sense is this: 'Where then is your 
 
 self-felicitation ? Your boasting of happiness, 
 in view of my presence and preaching among 
 you ? Hits it vanished so .soon ? Have you 
 no longer any heart to congratulate yourselves 
 on hiiving tiie gospel ministered to you, or on 
 having been accepted in Christ and made 
 heirs of God?' But if the other reading be 
 preferred, the sense will naturally be: "Of 
 what sort, then, was your self-felicitation? 
 your calling yoVirselves happy, because of my 
 ministry of the gospel among you? How 
 shallow and vain it must have been ! Or, 
 how strange and inexplicable in the light of 
 your present course!' The former reading 
 and explanation are preferable, we think, to 
 the latter.'' For I bear you record that, if 
 it had been possible, ye would have 
 plucked out your own eyes and have given 
 them to me. Here the Revised Version is 
 more accurate : For I bear you witness, that, 
 if possible, ye would have plucked out your 
 eyes and given them to me. The emphasis 
 belongs to the word 'eyes,' not to the pronoun 
 'your,' and therefore 'own' should not be 
 added in translating the Greek. The 'eyes' 
 are mentioned because of their preciousness. 
 Compare Ps. 17 : 8; Zech. 2 : 8. Paul means 
 to say that the Galatians were at that time 
 ready to do anything in their power for him. 
 Tlieir love was then ardent and apparently 
 free from any tincture of selfishness or su.'^pi- 
 oion. Notwithstanding his infirmity in the 
 flesh those were blessed days to the apostle, 
 and he feels that a reference to them must 
 touch the hearts of his Galatian children. 
 16. Am I therefore become your ene- 
 
 1 Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, and the 
 Canterbury Revisers insert 'your' in the text with 
 X * A B I) * F G, and the Vulgate and Coptic Versions. 
 Besides, as the more difficult reading, it would not have 
 bren likely to take the place of an easier one. 
 
 2 The reading nov ovv is supported by the earliest 
 MSS. X A B C F G P, and is accepted by Tischendorf, 
 Tregellcs, Lachmann, Westcott and Hort,Siefrert. Light- 
 foot and Meyer supj/ose that the original text was 
 nt ovi', since it is easy to see how iroC could be substi- 
 
 tuted for Ti>, "especially as .several of the Greek com- 
 mentators who read ti« explain it by irov," while it is 
 hard to account for the displacing of iroC by tU. Per- 
 haps the great preponderance of manuscript authority 
 should be considered decisive in favor of the easier 
 reading in such a case as this. Yet if it were necessary 
 to adopt the more difficult reading ti« ov>', the meaning 
 niighl still he (as Lightfoot insists),-" What has become 
 of your rejoicing? Where has it vanished Cunder- 
 standing «<7Ti) 7 " 
 
58 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV. 
 
 17 They zealously affect you, but not well ; yea, they I 17 come your enemy, ^ by telling you the truth ? They 
 
 ■would exclude you, that ye might atfect them. 
 
 18 But i/ is good to be zealously atiected always in a 
 good tkiitfj, ana not only when I am present wiih you. 
 
 1.) My little cliildieii, of whom 1 travail in birth 
 again until Christ be formed in you, 
 
 zealously seek you in uo good way ; nay, they desire 
 
 18 to shut you out, that ye may seek them. But it 
 is good to be zealously sought in a good matter at all 
 times, and not only when I am present with you. 
 
 19 My little children, of whom I am again in travail 
 
 1 Or, hy dealing truly with you. 
 
 my, because I tell you the truth? Com- 
 piire tlie Kevised Version : So then am I 
 become your enemy ? etc. The apostle discerns 
 in them a change of feeling toward himself as 
 well as toward the gospel which he had always 
 preached, such a change that they treated him 
 as if he were an enemy rather than their spir- 
 itual father. ' Because I tell you the truth ' 
 is a present or imperfect participle (dAjjeeOioi'), 
 and might be tr.inslated 'by speaking to you 
 the truth,' or even 'by dealing truly with 
 you.' The former is generally preferred, as 
 the apostle had dealt with them as a preacher 
 and teaclier, and as speaking truth is the or- 
 dinary sense of the word. "To what period 
 does the participle refer? Certainly not (a) 
 to the present Epi-^^tle, as the apostle could not 
 now know what the effect [of it] would be 
 (Schott); nor (6) to i\ie first visit, when the 
 state of feeling (ver. is) was so very different, 
 but (c) to the second (acu 18:23), when Judaism 
 had probably made rapid advances." (EUi- 
 cott. ) That visit took place not long after the 
 scene at Antioch, described in 2 : 11-21. 
 
 17. They zealously affect you, but not 
 well; yea, they Avould exclude you, that 
 ye may affect them. The Revised Version 
 substitutes 'seek' for 'affect,' 'in no good 
 way' for 'not well,' and 'nay' for 'yea.' 
 There appears to be no sufficient reason for 
 rendering the Greek word (iAAaj either 'yea' 
 or 'nay,' for the usual translation 'but' ful- 
 fills every claim of the context, thus: They 
 zealously seek you in no good way, but they 
 desire to shut you out, that ye inay seek them. 
 The word translated 'zealously seek' evi- 
 dently signifies 'pay court to.' But froin 
 what do the Judaists desire to exclude their 
 Gtilatian adherents? Probably "from other 
 teachers who do not belong to their clique, as 
 Paul and those agreeing with him" (Sieffert), 
 or "from Paul and that sounder portion of 
 the church with which he in thought as.soci- 
 ates himself" (Eilicott. ) We prefer the 
 former, because the word 'them ' in the clause 
 'that ye may seek them' probably refers to 
 them in their role as teachers, and Suggests 
 
 thtit those from whom tlie Judtiists wished to 
 exclude their followers were also teachers. 
 
 18. But it is good to be zealously 
 affected always in a good thing, and not 
 only when I am with you. If we have cor- 
 rectly exphiined ver. 17, the Kevised Version 
 should also be followed in this : But it is good 
 to be zealously sought in a good matter at all 
 times, a7id not only when I am present ivith 
 you. Thus Paul approves of their being 
 sought in a good ctiuse, or, better still, in a 
 good way (EllicLtt); for they had been sought 
 most earnestly by himself when he was pres- 
 ent with them, and they were even now 
 sought by him when he was not present in 
 person, but was making his appeal by letter. 
 According to Sieffert-Meyer the sense is as fol- 
 lows: ' While those Judaists do not seek j-ou 
 in a good way, it is nevertheless good that one 
 be sought in a good cause, and therefore good 
 that ye should be sought by me in good at all 
 times, and not merely when I tim with you in 
 person.' No other explantition of the verso 
 is so satisfactory as this. The obvious mean- 
 ing of the Ctmimon Version is very different; 
 namely, that Paul approves of their being 
 zealous themselves in a good causeat all times, 
 and not merely when they tire stimuhited by 
 his presence. This is unsatisfactory, (1) be- 
 cause it assigns to the verb 'to be zealously 
 affected ' a sense which it cannot have in the 
 preceding verse, and (2) because the words 
 'good' and 'in a good thing' naturally con- 
 nects this verse with the first clause of ver. 
 17, and not with the last. Ellicott's transla- 
 tion brings out very clearly the thought of 
 ver. 17, 18: "They pay you court in no 
 honest way; yea, they desire to exclude .you, 
 that ye may pay them court. But it is good 
 to be courted in honesty at all times, and 
 not only when I am present with you." 
 
 19. My little children, of whom I travail 
 in birth again until Christ be formed in 
 you. The Revised Ver.-ion says: 'I am 
 again in travail ' for 'I tnivail in birth again.' 
 Paul compares his deep solicitude and painful 
 anxiety for the Galatians to the feelings of a 
 
Ch. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 59 
 
 20 I desire to be |>reseiit with yoii now, aud tocbange 
 my voice; lor I stand in doubt of yon. 
 
 .il Tell me. ye thai desire to be under the law, do ye 
 not hear the law ? 
 
 20 until Christ be formed in you— yea, I could wish to 
 be present with you iiott, and to change my voice ; 
 for 1 am perplexed about you. 
 
 21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye 
 
 uiollier in tfavail. He had once before ex- 
 ])erienced a similar anxiety in their behalf, 
 namely, at tlie time of their conversion. Now 
 he experiences the same again, as he waits for 
 their return to Clirist. This return he speaks 
 of as if it were a new l)irth. Yet it would be 
 pressing his wordS unduly to find in thein the 
 doctrine of a "second conversion," in the 
 modern sense of the expression. They had 
 indeed turned away from the simplicity of 
 the faith, and had begun to look upon legal 
 works as necessary to salvation". At the same 
 time, as we may safely conclude, the ardor of 
 their love to Christ had diminished. In such 
 circumstances their return to hi in would be 
 the renewal of their Christian life; and he 
 would then be formed in them, the hope of 
 glory. Tliere is a wonderful tenderness and 
 faith expressed by these words of the great 
 apostle, especially if we ascribe to him in this 
 passage the use of John's endearing word, 
 'little children.' But there is some reast)n to 
 doubt whether he wrote tliis word. It may 
 be due to an error of transcription.^ Yet the 
 singular fitness of the affectionate diminutive 
 to the context pleads in its support, as well as 
 the possibility that a transcriber may have 
 thought the word 'children' Ptiuline, and the 
 word 'little children' Johannine. Westcott 
 and Hort, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Sieftert-Meyer, 
 and a majority of scholars retain the diminu- 
 tive. 
 
 20. I desire to be present with you now, 
 and to change my voice ; for I stand in 
 doubt of you. The Revision reads: " Fea, I 
 could wish to be present vnth you now, and to 
 change my voice; for I am perplexed about 
 you." Ellicott translates: "I could indeed 
 wish," etc. — that is, if it were possible, and 
 this represents appropriately what is implied 
 by the imperfect tense of the verb. He feels 
 tliat they cannot understand him as they 
 would, if he were there speaking to them vivo 
 voce. If he were with them, he could use 
 more gentleness and less severity. His tone 
 could be changed. And the reason why he 
 could wish this is expressed in the last clause. 
 
 "because I am perplexed about you." Liter- 
 ally, 't« you,' winch is not good English, 
 though the preposition 'in' points to the ob- 
 ject or sphere in which his perplexity takes its 
 rise. 
 
 Conclusion of the Argument by a Bib- 
 lical Allegory. (21-31.) — "This second 
 part of the discussion he closes by employing 
 the history of Abraham and his family as an 
 allegory or illustrtition of the two systems 
 which he has been considering. Thesubjoined 
 are the main points of the comparison which 
 he institutes here. Judaism, or the legal sys- 
 tem, of which Hagar, wiio was a bondwoman, 
 may be considered as a type, imposes a spir- 
 itual bondage on those who adhere to it; 
 wheroiis Christianity, wiiieh is a Free Dispen- 
 sation, and hence fitly represented by Stirah, 
 who was a freewoman, libertites men from 
 this bondage, and makes them the children 
 of God. Again, as Ishmael was born in a 
 mere natural way, so tiie Jews are a mere 
 natural seed; but Christians, who obtain jus- 
 tification in conformity with the promise made 
 to Abraham, are the true promised seed, even 
 as Isaac was. Further, as in the typical his- 
 tory, Ishmael persecuted Isaac, the cliild of 
 promise, so it is not to be accounted strange 
 that, under the gospel, the natural seed, that 
 is, the Jews, should persecute the spiritual 
 seed, that is. Christians. And, finally, as Isaac 
 was acknowledged as the true heir, but Ish- 
 mael was set aside, so must it be as to the dif- 
 ference which exists between Jews and be- 
 lievers. The former, or, in other words, tho.se 
 who depend on their own merit for obtaining 
 the favor of God, will be rejected; while those 
 who seek it by faith shall realize the blessing. 
 (4:21.23.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 21. Tell me, ye that desire to be under 
 the law, do ye not hear the law? The 
 word law appears to be used in the first clause 
 of tlie Mosaic Code, and in the second of the 
 Pentateuch in which that code was written. 
 Those addressed are supposed to be inclined 
 to accept the doctrine of the Judaizing teach- 
 ers, and to rely upon obedience to the law as 
 
 1 Forannmberofthebe.stuncialshflvechildpn (T€<ci'a\ I wliile the lr.<!S important uncialsX* A C D'" E K L P, 
 instead of ' little children ' (xeKua)— p. j^., {< * B D * F G, ' have ' little children ' [rticvia). 
 
60 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV. 
 
 22 For it is written, that Abraliam had two sons, the 
 one by a bondmaid, the oiher by a tree woman. 
 
 23 Jiiit he iflw was of the bondwoman was born after 
 tlie flesh ; but he of the freewomau was liy promise. 
 
 24 Which things are an ullef;ory : for these are the 
 two covenants; tlie one from the mount Sinai, which 
 gcndereih to bondage, which is Agar. 
 
 2.) ior this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and 
 answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is iu bond- 
 age with her children. 
 
 22 not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraliiim 
 had two sous, one by tlie handmaid, and one by the 
 
 23 treewouutu. Howbtit the sun by the handmaid is 
 born after the llesh ; but the sun by the freewomau 
 
 24 is burn through promise. Which things contain an 
 allegory : for these women are two covenants ; oiie 
 from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, 
 
 25 which is ilagar. i Now this Hagar is mount Simi, 
 in Arabia, and ausweieili to the Jerusalem that 
 now is: for she is iu bondage with her children. 
 
 1 Many aucieot autboritie^ read For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia. 
 
 well as upon the work of Christ as a ground 
 of acceptance with God. Whether 'do ye 
 not hear the law?' means 'do ye not hear it 
 read in your meeting? " or ' do ye not hearken 
 to it, giving ear to what it really says?' is 
 perhaps doubtful. The question, however, is 
 quite as striking, if understood in the former 
 way. In that case, the apostle expresses by 
 it his surprise that they can wish to be under 
 the law after having even heard it read, to 
 say iKjthing of having penetrated by earnest 
 attention its deeper meaning. In either case, 
 however, the sense is pertinent. 
 
 23. For it is written, that Abraham had 
 two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the 
 other by a free woman. Compare Genesis, 
 chiipters 16 and 21. The Revised Version is 
 more litenil: 'One by the handmaid, and one 
 by the free woman,' the word 'handmaid' be- 
 ing regarded as synonymous with the word 
 'bondmaid.' 
 
 23. But he {whoiinis) of the bondwoman 
 was borp after the flesh ; but he of the 
 free woman was by promise. Here the 
 Common Version translates 'bondwoman,' 
 instead of 'bondmaid,' in the preceding verse. 
 Uniformity of rendering would have been 
 better. Again, the Revisers have supplied 
 the word 'the son,' instead of 'who was," and 
 of 'he,' which is an improvement: 'Howbeit 
 the son bj'^ the handmaid is born after the 
 flesh, but the son by the free woman (is born) 
 through promise.' The birth of Ishmael had 
 in it nothing indicative of divine intervention, 
 nothing contrary to the course of nature; but 
 that of Isaac was due to the promise of God, 
 and was brought to pass by virtue of that 
 promise, against the ordimiry course of nature. 
 
 24. Which things are an allegory— or, 
 according to the Revised Version, contain an 
 allegory., which seems to be a just interpreta- 
 tion of the original word. For that word sig- 
 nifies to express one thing under the figure of 
 another. "An allegory," says Hesychius, 
 
 "suggests something besideg what is heard." 
 The expression ' which things' refers not only 
 to the facts of the birth of the two sons, but 
 also to the principal features of the narrative 
 as a whole and in geiienil. For these are 
 the two covenants — rather, these women are, 
 or represent.! two covenants. The 'for' makes 
 this sentence explanatory of the preceding 
 statement. 'Which things contain an alle- 
 gory ; for these women mean two covenants.' 
 CoiTipare Matt. 13 : 39; 26 : 26-28; Gen. 40 : 
 26, 27. The one from the Mount Sinai, 
 which gendereth to bondage, which is 
 Agar. 'The' before Mount Sinai is wrongly 
 inserted by the translators, and the Revised 
 Version is, on the whole, better: One from 
 Mount Sinai, bearing children mito bondage, 
 whicfi is Hagar. "The Sinaitic Covenant is 
 allegorically identical with Hagar." (Sieftert- 
 Meyer. ) 
 
 25. For this Agar is mount Sinai in 
 Arabia. A very difficult sentence, trans- 
 lated as follows in the Bible Union Revision: 
 " (for the word Hagar is Mount Sinai in Ara- 
 bia)." The article before Hagar in the Greek 
 text is not feminine, as it must have been if 
 the reference were to the bondmaid of Abra- 
 ham, but neuter, as if pointing to the word 
 itself, or to its meaning and use in Arabia. 
 The noun Hagar, Paul says, is equivalent in 
 Arabia, or among the Arabs, to the name 
 Mount Sinai. "Paul informs us," says Dr. 
 Hiickett, "in Gal. 4 : 25, that one of the names 
 of Sinai in Arabia was Hagar. No other 
 writer mentions such a name, and the apostle 
 may be supposed to have learned the ftict 
 during his visit to that country, (cai. i:i7.) 
 This contact between the two passages is cer- 
 tainly remarkable." "'I went into Arabia,' 
 saj's St. Paul, in describing his conversion to 
 the Gentiles. It is tiselcss to speculate, yet 
 when, in a later chapter of the same epistle, 
 the words fall upon ourownears, 'This Hagar 
 is mount Sinai in Arabia,' it is difficult to re- 
 
Ch. IV.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 61 
 
 2?; But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the 
 mother of us all. 
 
 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest 
 not; break I'.jrtli ami cry, thou that travailest not: for 
 tlie desolate hatli many more cliildreu than she which 
 hath a husbind. 
 
 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children 
 of promise. 
 
 2G But the Jerusalem tljat is above is free, which is 
 
 27 our mother. For it is written, 
 
 Kejoiee, thou barren that bearest not ; 
 Biealv forth and cry,tliou that travailest not: 
 For ni();-e are the children of tlie desolate than 
 of her who liath the husband. 
 
 2S Now 1 we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of 
 
 1 Mauy aacieut authorities read yt. 
 
 sist the thought that he, too, may have stood 
 upon the rocks of Sinai, and heard from Arab 
 lips the often repeated 'Hagar,' — 'rock,' — 
 suggesting the double meaning to which the 
 text alludes.'' (8tanley,"8inai and Palestine," 
 p. 50.)' And aiiswereth to {tJie) Jerusalem 
 Avhicli now is — or the present Jerusalem. 
 'Answereth' — is in the row or rank with, 
 stands in the same category with. But what 
 is the subject of this verb? Is it 'one' (cov- 
 enant) from Mount Sinai, or Mount Sinai 
 where the covenant was established, or Hagar 
 the bondwoman who is figuratively identical 
 with the covenant and with Sinai ? The next 
 clause is an argument in favor of holding the 
 subject of this verb to be Hagar. For she is 
 in bonda§;e. The Kevised Version of that 
 clause is correct ; namely, for she is in bond- 
 age with her children. The present Jerusalem 
 with her children are the Jewish people in 
 bondage to the law, just as Hagar was in 
 bondage with her children. ^ 
 
 26. But {the) Jerusalem Avhich is above 
 is free. We insert the article from the Greek 
 text before Jerusalem, in order that the con- 
 trast between 'the Jerusalem which now is' 
 jind 'the Jerusalem which is above' may De 
 fully preserved. In his Epistle to the Philip- 
 ))ians, Paul declares that "our citizensiiip is 
 in heaven" (^:2o); in the Epistle to the He- 
 brews it is written: "but ye are come unto 
 mount Zion, and unto the city of the living 
 God, the heavenly Jerusalem" (12:22); and in 
 the Book of Revelation it is said: "I will 
 write upon him the name ... of the city of 
 my God, the new Jerusalem, which cometh 
 down out of heaven fif)m my God." (Sfiz.) 
 
 Compare 21:2. 'The Jerusalem above' is 
 therefore a figurative expression, equivalent 
 to the heavenly Jerusalem or the new Jerusa- 
 lem, conceived of as tiie home of believers in 
 Christ. Whicli is the mother of us all — 
 more accurately: which, is our 7nother ; for 
 the word 'all' is an addition to tbe original 
 text. In the Hebrew idiom, a city is spoken 
 of as the mother of her citizens. Her condi- 
 tion is theirs, and their condition is hers. 
 They are born in her, and are often called in 
 a collective sen.se her 'daughter.' (is:i.52:2; 
 
 62 : 11 ; Jer. 4 : :il ; 6:3; Micah 4 : 5.) 
 
 27. For it is written. Rejoice, thou 
 barren, that bearest not: break forth 
 and cry, thou that travailest not: for the 
 desolate hath many more children than 
 she which hath a husband. Addressed to 
 confirm the preceding statement tlmt the free 
 Jerusalem is our mother. The last clause is 
 translated as follows in the Revised Version: 
 "for more are the children of the desolate 
 than of her which hath the husband" ; and 
 by the Bible Union Version : " because many 
 are the children of the desolate, rather than 
 of her who has the husband." Hence the 
 meaning must be either that, while both 
 have children, those of the former are ' many ' 
 but those of the latter are not; or that, while 
 both have children, those of the former are 
 many, even more than those of the latter. 
 Tlio words are quoted from the Greek Version 
 of Isaiah 54:1, a passage whose Me.<sianic char- 
 acter was generally admitted. It is the Jeru- 
 salem above, the New Covenant, represented in 
 the allegory by Sarah, that is to be so fruitful. 
 
 28. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was. 
 
 1 Yet the text is doubtful. Instead of to yap (X C F 
 G K L P), TO Se is found in -several of the best MSS. But 
 the meaning of the sentence is about the same wliich- 
 ever conjunction is proferred. Tischendorf has the 
 former, Westcott and Hort the latter. A fjai n, ".Vvap 
 is read before 2i>'a in A B D E K L P, but is wanting in 
 K C F G and the later Fathers. On internal as well as 
 external grounds, it seems necessary to consider this 
 word a part of the te.Kt as it came froiu the hand of 
 
 Paul. For the M.SS. in favor of the insertion are decid- 
 edly superior to those in favor of the omission of "Ayap, 
 and the reading is also a more difficult one. 
 
 2 The reading 'for,' instead of 'and,' is required by 
 the best MS.*^. (X A B C D * F G P) and several of the 
 early revisions (Snhidio, Memphilic, Syriao Peschito), 
 and with this reading the natural stibject of the verb is 
 ' the i)resent Jerusalem.' 
 
62 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. IV. 
 
 29 But as then he that was born after the flesh perse- 
 cuted him Ikat was burn after the Spirit, even so it is 
 niiw. 
 
 :iO Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out 
 the bomhvouian ami her sou: lor the son of the bond- 
 woman shall not be heir with tlie son of the free woman. 
 
 31. So then, ijret'iren, we are not cliildren of the 
 bondwoman, but of the free. 
 
 29 promise. But as then he that was born after tlie 
 flesh persecuted bim t/iat was born alter the Spirit, 
 
 30 even so it is now. Howbeit what saiih the Script- 
 ure? Cast out the bandniiid and her son : for the 
 sou of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son 
 
 31 of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not 
 children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. 
 
 are the children of promise. A more pre- 
 cise rendering of tlie Greek text would omit 
 'the' bef(jre 'children.' And it is also note- 
 worthy that 'promise' is rendered emphatic 
 by tlie position which is given it in the sen- 
 tence. The Bible Union Revision follows an- 
 other text, and translates the verse : ' But ye, 
 brethren, after the manner of Isaac, are chil- 
 dren of promise.' ^ The essential meaning of 
 the verse is the same whichever pronoun is 
 correct. There is, however, some reason on 
 the ground of textual authority to prefer ' ye,' 
 and this direct application of the thought to 
 tiie Galatians must be pronounced very nat- 
 ural and forcible. 
 
 29. But as then he that was born after 
 the fleish persecuted him that was born 
 after the Spirit, even so it is now. The 
 language of this verse probably refers in the 
 first instance to Gen. 21 : 9, where Sarah is 
 said to have seen Ishmael 'mocking,' or, lit- 
 erally, laughing. Perhaps the laughter was 
 mocking laughter. "As Abraham had laughed 
 for joy concerning Isaac, and Sarah had 
 laughed incredulously, so now Ishmael laughed 
 in derision, and probablj' in a persecuting 
 and tyrannical spirit." (Bp. Harold Browne, 
 in the " Bible Commentary.") Compare Gen. 
 21 : 6 and Ezek. 23 : 32. The tense of the verb 
 'persecuted' (iSiwKev) represents the action as 
 in progress or continuous, not as completed; 
 and it is conceivable that Paul regarded the 
 event described in Gen. 21 :9 as only the first 
 manifestation of a hostilitj' which had been 
 characteristic of the Ishmaelite line ever si nee. 
 Compare Ps. 83 : 7 ; 1 Chron. 5 : 10, 19. ' Born 
 after the fli-sh' means born in a natural man- 
 ner; 'born after the Spirit' means born in a 
 superniitural manner — that is, in accordance 
 with a promise given and fulfilled by the 
 Sjtirit of God. It is plain that Paul looked 
 upon the extraordinary birth of Isaac as hav- 
 
 ing its counterpart in the regeneration of men 
 by the Spirit of God. 
 
 30. Nevertheless what saith the Script- 
 ure? Cast out the bondwoman and her 
 son: for the son of the bondwoman shall 
 not be heir with the son of the freewoman. 
 The words of Sarah quoted in this verse are 
 called 'the Scripture,' or what 'the Scripture 
 saith,' as if they were a disclosure of the 
 divine will. (Gen. -21:9.) And this they cer- 
 tainly were ; for, though grievous to Abraham 
 (see ver. 11), they were distinctly approved 
 by Jehovah (ver. 12): "In all that Sarah saith 
 unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in 
 Isaac shall thy seed be called." The import 
 of this in Paul's discussi(jn is very plain. Not 
 only are those who simply trust in Christ 
 without the works of the law accepted and 
 justified by God, but those who rely upon 
 legal ordinances and service for divine favor 
 are rejected. The law must give place to the 
 gospel; Judaism must be severed from Chris- 
 tianity. Those who are insisting with fanat- 
 ical zeal upon the necessity of circumcision to 
 salvation, are Ishmaelites, not Israelites, sons 
 of the bondwoman and not sons of the free- 
 woman. Yet at this very time the Judaizing 
 party in the churches of Palestine was preter- 
 naturally active tind apparently successful. 
 How absolute was the apostle's confidence in 
 the truth of his gospel ! 
 
 31. So then, brethren, Ave are not chil- 
 dren of the bondwoman, but of the free. 
 A better text is followed bj' the Revisers : 
 Wherefore {Si6, instead of opa), brethren, we are 
 not children of a (not 'the') handmaid {bond- 
 woman), but of the freewoman. 'A bond- 
 woman' is equivalenUto any bondwoman, be- 
 cause there are manj' legal systems by which 
 men are kept in bondage. ^The freewoman,' 
 because there is but one cftvenant of promise, 
 represented in the allegory by Sarah. How 
 
 'This text is supported by excellent manuscripts 
 (B D * F Ct 6. 17. 61. 67 ** and others), thouph not by the 
 most important early versions. Lachmann, Tischen- 
 dorf, Trcgelles, SiefFert-Meyer, Ellicott, l.ightfoot, Boise, 
 und many others accept the reading 'ye,' but Westcott 
 
 and Hort, with the Canterbury Revisers, prefer 'we.' 
 It is diflicult to decide between these readings, but the 
 occurrence of the first per.son plural in verses 26 and 31 
 may have led transcribers to change the ' ye ' into ' we ' 
 in this intervening verse. 
 
Ch. v.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 63 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 STAND fast tlierefoie in the liberty wherewith Christ 
 hath made us free, aud be nut eutungled again witli 
 tlie yoke of bondage. 
 
 1 For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast 
 therefore, aud be not entangled again in a yoke of 
 bondage. 
 
 highly did tlie apostle prize the freedom of 
 Christian life and ln)pe! 
 
 Here may be found the last step in Paul's 
 argument for tlie gospel as revealing a perfect 
 way of life. The remainder of his Epistle is 
 more practical than argumentative or contro- 
 versial. But it is no less instructive on that 
 account: it is full of thought, some of which 
 is complementary to what has been already 
 written. 
 
 Ch. 5 : "The apostle here exhorts the Gala- 
 tians to maintain their liberty in Chri.st, be- 
 cause the surrender of it would deprive them 
 of all benefit from the gospel, and render them 
 debtors to keep the whole law in order to be 
 saved. (1-6.) He reminds them of the sad 
 contrast between their present state and the 
 commencement of their Christian career; 
 cautions them against the danger even of in- 
 cipient error, and reminds them how absurd 
 it was to appeal to his own example in excuse 
 for their perversion of the rite of circum- 
 cision. (7-12.) He expresses the wish that 
 those who were misleading them might be cut 
 off from all connection with them, and be 
 accounted as outcasts and heretics. (12.) He 
 then turns to warn them again.st an abuse of 
 their Christian liberty, enjoins upon them an 
 observance of the law as a rule of duty, the 
 essence of which is love, and the requirement 
 of wiiich in that respect they would be enabled 
 to fulfill by following the dictates of the Spirit. 
 (13-18.) To enable them to judge whether 
 they are actuated by the Spirit, or an opposite 
 principle, he enumerates, first, some of the 
 works of the flesh, and then the characteristic 
 fruits of the Spirit. (19-26.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 1-G.TheGalatians Exhorted to Main- 
 
 tainTheik Free Christian Status, and 
 NOT BY Circumcision to Bind Themselves 
 TO Keep the Whole Law. 
 
 1. Stand fast therefore in the liberty 
 wherewith Christ hath made us free, etc. 
 This translation follows a Greek text, not so 
 well supported by manuscript authority as the 
 text followed in the Revised Version : With 
 freedom did Christ set us free; stand fast 
 therefore, etc. Still better is the marginal 
 rendering, ' For freedom,' etc' And the word 
 'freedom' is emphatic. Y or freedom, and not 
 for pupilage or any inferior state, did Christ 
 set us free/ His deliverance of us from bond- 
 iige to the law was for the purpose of estab- 
 lishing us in the family of God as sons and 
 heirs. Yet none of these translations, except 
 the first, preserves the article before 'freedotn,' 
 though it belongs to the original text. Paul 
 evidently refers to the liberty of which he has 
 been speaking in the previous chapter — that is, 
 Christian liberty, and his meaning would be 
 more exactly expressed by retaining the article 
 and inserting an explamitory phrase: 'For 
 the freedom' [of sons and heirs] 'did Christ 
 set us free.' Tlie same result might be secured 
 by translating the article tJiis: ' For this free- 
 dom did Christ set us free.' But it is, perhaps, 
 better to forego perfect clearness of statement 
 than to purchase it by an addition to the origi- 
 nal text, or by a free rendering of the article. 
 To introduce his exhortation, the apostle gath- 
 ers up into a single sentence the result of his 
 discussion, giving the place of emphasis to the 
 word 'freedom' : 'With (or, for) the freedom 
 (just spoken of) did Christ set us free; stand 
 fast, therefore, and be not entangled again in 
 a yoke of bondage.' * ' Entangled,' or, en- 
 snared, is sometimes u.sed with reference to a 
 
 1 Far die Freiheit hat uns Christus be/reit, is Weizsac- 
 ker's translation. Compare Buttniann (Thayer's), pp_ 
 178, 179. 
 
 2 The text of the first clause is by no means certain, 
 yet the readiiij; approved by the Revised Version, West- 
 cott and Ilort, Tischendorf, Meyer, Schaff, and others, 
 is sustained by a clear preponderance of testimony. It 
 differs from the Tcxtus Receptus by placing ovv after 
 CTTijictTe instead of eAeuSepta, by having no relative jj, 
 and by reading i^mo? xP"''''os instead of xptaTos »)/nos. 
 The ovv is not foun.'. in the first clause after «A«wd<pia 
 
 in XABC*DEFGP and many cursives, or in the 
 Vulgate, Memphitic, Sahidic, Armenian, Gothic, or 
 Syriac (Peschito) Versions. Only Cc K L and many 
 cursives have it. Nearly the same manuscripts and 
 versions have this conjunction after (rrijiceTe. The rela- 
 tive jj is wanting in N A B C D* P and present in 
 J) b et c ]^ y^ jjjjfj niany cursives. It is ea-sy to see how 
 this relative might be inserted by a transcriber for the 
 sake of rendering the language of the apostle more per- 
 spicuous. 
 
64 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. V. 
 
 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circum- 
 cised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 
 
 3 i'or I testify again to every man that is circum- 
 cised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 
 
 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever 
 of you are justitied by the law ; ye are fallen from 
 grace. 
 
 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive 
 
 3 circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, 
 I testify again to every man that receiveth eircum-. 
 
 4 cision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye 
 are i severed from Christ, ye who would be justified 
 
 1 Gr., brought to nought. 
 
 net in which one is caught and held; and here 
 a yoke of religious bondiige is evidently con- 
 ceived as something in which the Galatians 
 were liable to be cauglit and held captive. 
 Formerly they had been in bondage to the 
 superstitious fears and rites of heathenism; 
 now they were in danger of accepting the no 
 less useless and burdensome ritual of Judaism. 
 They were moving in the wrong direction, 
 away from spiritual liberty into spiritual sla- 
 very, and the apostle's heart is deeply moved 
 with anxiety to preserve them from so great a 
 calamity. 
 
 2. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if 
 ye be circumcised, Christ shall (will) 
 profit you nothing. In their circumstances, 
 submission to circumcision would involve a 
 relinquishment of their faith in Christ, a vir- 
 tual confession that he was not an all-suiBcient 
 Saviour, "the way and the truth and the life," 
 and a return to worl<s of law as being the only 
 ground of acceptance with God. It may be 
 assumed that they would not entertain the 
 thought of being circumcised, unless they were 
 led to suppose they could not be saved without 
 it, and so were led to trust in obedience to the 
 law for salvation; and Paul saw that, if they 
 were to do this, they would be in a more hope- 
 less condition than they were before hearing 
 the gospel. By the words, ' I Paul,' the iipos- 
 tle assumes a right to speak with authority, 
 and shows that he expects his authority to 
 have some weight with those addressed. 
 
 3. For I testify again to every man that 
 is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do 
 the Avhole law. Observe the changes in 
 the Revised Version — 'yea' instead of 'for,' 
 and 'roceiveth circumcision' instead of 'is 
 circumcised.' In both cases the Revision is an 
 improvement. The apostle is speaking to the 
 point. Every Galatian Christian who allows 
 himself to be circumcised undertakes by that 
 act to obey the whole Jewish Law, moral and 
 ceremonial. For that law in its origin and 
 purpose is a unit, and he that confesses his 
 obligation to obey one part of it admits his 
 
 obligation to obey every part of it. He that 
 trusts f9r salvation in his obedience to any 
 requirement of the law, makes his salvation 
 depend on obedience to everj' requirement of 
 the law. "For whosoever shall keep the 
 whole law, and yet stumble in one point, is 
 become guilty of all."' James 2 : 10, Revised 
 Version ; compare Gal. 3 : 10. The adverb 
 ' again ' implies his utterance of the stime truth 
 before, probably when he was last with them 
 (1:9); if not at that time, then in this Epistle. 
 See 3 : 10. 
 
 4. Christ is become of no eflect unto 
 you, whosoever of you are justified by 
 the laAV. It is difficult to make a satisfactory 
 translation of the first clause. The Revised 
 Version reads : ' Ye are severed from Christ.' 
 The Bible Union Version : 'Ye are separated 
 from Christ.' Dr. Davidson : " Ye wepe sepa- 
 rated from Christ." It is better, however, to 
 render the Greek verb in this clause by the 
 English perfect tense: 'Ye have been sei)a- 
 rated from Christ' — that is, your separation 
 from Christ is a completed act in the case of 
 those of you who are seeking to be justified in 
 law. There is no article before the original 
 word for 'law,' and though the Jewish Law be 
 meant, it is thought of as standing for all 
 divin6law; and the meaning is this, that one 
 who is now resorting to law for justification 
 has thereby severed his connection with Christ. 
 Hence, Paul employ's the tense of completed 
 action in the next clause: Ve are fallen 
 from grace. And this is as much as to say, 
 by your first movement toward the legal sys- 
 tem, toward a reliance upon works of law for 
 acceptance with God, j'ou have surrendered in 
 principle your confidence in Christ as the 
 ground of hope. The apostle has in view their 
 standing before God as fixed by a logical inter- 
 pretation of their conduct. By that conduct 
 they turn away from salvation through grace, 
 and sink back into the condition of men who 
 are seeking to work out a righteousness of their 
 own. What Christ himself may yet do for 
 them in his great mercy is not said, but the 
 
Ch. v.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 G5 
 
 5 For we thnmgh the Spirit wait for the hope of 
 righteousness by faith. 
 
 G For in .Iomis Christ neither circumcision availeth 
 any thing, nor uucircuiucisiou; but faith which workelli 
 by love. 
 
 7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye 
 should not obey the truth? 
 
 5 by the law ; ye are fallen away from grace. For 
 we through tlic Spirit by faith wait for the hope of 
 
 6 righlcoiisness. For in Christ Jesus ueithtT circum- 
 cision availeth anything, nor uncirciinicision ; but 
 
 7 faiih 1 working through love. Ye were running 
 well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey 
 
 1 Or, wrought. 
 
 attitude which they are taking toward his 
 woriv for them is faithfully shown. Hence, 
 the apostle is not teaching in this passage the 
 modern doctrine of "falling from grace," 
 whatever may be the bearing of the entire 
 Epistle on tlie truth of that doctrine. 
 
 5. For we through the Spirit wait for 
 the hope of righteousness by faith. The 
 connective 'for' make this verse confirmatory 
 of the preceding statement, (ver. 4.) The fact 
 that true Christians await in faith the fulfill- 
 ment of their hope is an evidence that one 
 wlio is turning to legal works for salvation has 
 fallen away from the method of grace. 'The 
 hope' cannot here mean the feeling of hope, 
 because Christians are not 'waiting for' that; 
 they already possess it. It must rather signify 
 that which is hoped for, the object of hope. 
 But this hoped-for good is in some way defined 
 by the words 'of righteousness.' What then 
 does the word righteousness here signify? It 
 may either denote a perfect moral character 
 as that which is hoped for, or it may denote 
 acceptance with God through Christ, which is 
 the pledge of that which is hoped for, that is, 
 eternal life. In other words, it may signify 
 either righteousness or justification. And as 
 the latter meaning is suggested by the whole 
 previous argument, as well as by the sense of 
 the corresponding verb in the foregoing verse, 
 we adopt it here. Thus this verse teaches tliat 
 eternal life, for which Christians wait in hope, 
 belongs to justification and will eventually 
 flow from it; that this justification and hope 
 are dependent on faith in Christ; and that this 
 faith itself is due to the work of the Holy 
 S|)irit: an exceedingly rich cluster of truths, 
 every one of which is a protest against the 
 Judaistic movement among the Galatians. 
 
 6. For in Jesus Christ neither circum- 
 cision availeth anything, nor uncircum- 
 cision ; but faith which worketh by love. 
 Union with Christ is the only condition of 
 acceptance with God. Obedience to the Jew- 
 ish Law has no power to help one who is in 
 fellowship with Christ; heathenism has as 
 
 little. Faith is the one indispensable thing, 
 and faith, if genuine, works by love; that is to 
 say, it exerts itself, puts forth its energy by 
 means of love to Christ, to Christians, and to 
 men. Faith, indeed, has great power, and 
 through the channel of love it lays hold of 
 God and man. "It is as much as to say," 
 remarks Lutlier, "he that will be a true Chris- 
 tian indeed, . . . must be a true believer. 
 Now he believeth not truly if works of charity 
 follow not his faith. . . . Paul, therefore, in 
 this place sets forth the whole life of a Chri.s- 
 tian man; namely, that inwardly it consist- 
 eth in faith toward God, who hath no need 
 of our works; and outwardly in our charity 
 or good works toward men, whom our faith 
 profitcth nothing." 
 
 This verse is often alleged in proof of Paul's 
 radical agreement with James. For the faith 
 which he describes as the root of the new life 
 is an energetic working principle; it is not 
 only a hand opened to receive, but also a hand 
 opened to give ; if it has boundless capacity 
 for trust, it has equal capacity for love. The 
 passage has also been alleged in proof of the 
 slight importance of any outward rites, even 
 though appointed by Christ. But without 
 reason ; for the apostle makes no reference to 
 Christian duties or ordinances, and love, with- 
 out which faith is dead, insists upon obedience 
 to the commands of the Master who is loved. 
 Kitual ob.-ervances as expressions of faith must 
 not be confounded with ritual observances as 
 works of righteousness on which the soul relies 
 for justification. 
 
 7-12. He Deplores their Leaning 
 TOWARDS Judaism, but has Confidence 
 
 THAT THEY YET AbIDE IN THE TrUTH, 
 
 AND Will Cast Out the Leaven of 
 False Teachers. 
 
 7. Ye did run well: who did hinder 
 you that ye should not obey the truth? 
 
 The imperfect tense of the Greek verb 'to 
 run' is more exactly rendered in the Revised 
 Version : Ve were running well. As Paul 
 looks back over their Christian, course pre- 
 
66 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. V. 
 
 8 This persuasion comefh not of him that calleth you. 
 
 9 A little leaven leaveneth the wli le lump. 
 
 10 I have contidetice in you through the Lord, that 
 ye will be none otherwise minded : but he that troub- 
 leth you shall bear his judgmeut, whosoever he be. 
 
 8 the truth ? This persuasion came not of him who 
 
 9 calleth you. A liitle leaven leaveneth the whole 
 10 lump. 1 have confidence to you-ward in the Lord, 
 
 that ye will be none otherwise minded : but he that 
 1 troub'leth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever 
 
 vioiis to the arrival of Judaizing teachers 
 among them, he can speak of it with praise. 
 Tliey were doing their work bravely. They 
 were mindful of the truth which he had 
 preached to them, and were seeking to grow 
 ill the grace and the knowledge of Clirist. 
 But a change was now manifest. They were 
 no longer pressing forward in the way of life. 
 And so he asks with some surprise and perhaps 
 indignation : ' Who is it that has cut off your 
 way and arrested your progress (compare 1 
 Thess. 2 : 18; Kom. 12 : 22; 1 Peter 3 : 7), so 
 that ye should not hearken to the true gospel ?' 
 Some one's persuasion had evidently been 
 more effective with them than that of the 
 truth itself, as preached by Paul, and by 
 others who accepted his views of the gospel. 
 
 8. This persuasion cometh not of him 
 that calleth you. A literal translation would 
 read : The persuasion is not from him that 
 calleth you. That is, the persuasion to wliich 
 I have just referred, and to which you have 
 hearkened, instead of hearkening to the truth, 
 is not from God who calls you from darkness 
 to light. The word ' persuasion ' may be 
 either active or passive ; it may signify the act 
 of persuading, or the result of that act, being 
 persuaded. Here it is commonly and cor- 
 rectly supposed to be active, especially because 
 of its connection with 'him that calleth.' 
 How dangerous this ' persuasion ' might be the 
 apostle now shows by an illustration. 
 
 9. A little leaven leaveneth the whole 
 lump. What is represented here by 'a little 
 leaven'? Many answer, false teaching; and 
 others, false teachers. The former insist that 
 the influence of erroneous teaching is more 
 like the influence of leaven than is the influ- 
 ence of false teachers. But the latter insist 
 that the context directs the mind to a small 
 company of teachers, and that their work 
 would diffuse itself through the churches as 
 leaven diffuses its energy through the whole 
 mass. We incline to the latter view, but do 
 not see that the meaning of the passage would 
 be essentially difl'erent if the former were 
 intended. The latter, however, throws a little 
 more emphasis on the personal element, and 
 
 we think it highly probable that the zeal of 
 the Judaizers, even more than the plausibility 
 of their teaching, was effective in spreading 
 tlieir influence. 
 
 10. I have confidence in you through 
 the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise 
 minded. Better : / have confidence in regard 
 to you in the Lord, etc. The pronoun 'I' is 
 emphatic : I myself, whatever others may say 
 or think, have confidence in you. 'In the 
 Lord' is added by the apostle because tlie 
 source of his confidence as to tlie future belief 
 of the Galatians is in Christ. The second 
 clause, ' that ye will be none otherwise 
 minded,' seems to mean that ye will think 
 and feel as I have expressed myself in regard 
 to this matter. In stiying this he may have 
 had in mind the context from ver. 7 to ver. 
 9 inclusive, which shows that the Judaists had 
 led the Galatians away from the truth in a 
 dangerous manner, or he may have htid in 
 mind the proverb just quoted, believing that 
 they would agree with him as to the danger 
 suggested by it. In either case, he is confident 
 that his Galatian bretliren, forewarned and 
 instructed, will agree with his view and, resist- 
 ing the teachers of error, regain their trust in 
 Christ alone for salvation. But he that 
 troubleth you shall bear his judgment, 
 whosoever he be. Literally, 'the judgment' 
 which his sin merits. The word ' trfjubleth ' 
 signifies to disturb the mind or the community. 
 Both these evils were no doubt occasioned by 
 the new teaching which contradicted that of 
 the apostle. Even the ardent, impulsive, un- 
 stable Galatians were not likely to be carried 
 over to Jewish legalism without a sharp strug- 
 gle in the minds of individuals or without 
 loud controversy in the churches. ' Shall bear 
 his judgment' is a clear recognition of divine 
 government and justice. The teacher of false 
 doctrine, however conspicuous he may be, 
 will not escape retribution. The ringleader 
 of this proselyting raid is accountable to God, 
 and at his tribunal will surely be made to bear 
 a heavy burden of displeasure. Yet there 
 may be no reference to any particular leader. 
 The singular may perhaps be used merely for 
 
Ch. v.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 67 
 
 11 And I, brethren, if I yet preacli circumcision, why 
 do I yet Slitter persecution? then is the ott'ence of the 
 cross ceased. 
 
 12 I would they were even cut ofF wliich trouble you. 
 1:J For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty ; 
 
 only ti.se not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by 
 love serve one another. 
 
 11 he be. But I, bretliren, if 1 still preach circum- 
 cision, why am I still persecuted? then hath the 
 
 12 stumblingblock of the cross been done away. 1 
 would that they who unsettle you would even ' go 
 beyond circumcision. 
 
 13 For ye, brethren, were called for freedom ; only 
 tisf not your freedom for an occasion to the flesh, 
 but tlirough love be servants one to another. 
 
 1 Or, mutilate thetntelve4. 
 
 emphasis, and the application be to every one 
 wlio was engaged in pressing circumcision on 
 the Galatians. 
 
 11. And I, brethren, if I yet preach cir- 
 cumcision, why do I yet suffer persecu- 
 tion? then is the offence of the cross 
 ceased. Or (Revised Version), But /, breth- 
 ren, if I still preach circurncision, why am I 
 still persecuted f then hath the stumbling- 
 block of the cross been done away. The con- 
 nection of this verse with the preceding is 
 obscure. But it may be supposed that Paul 
 was reminded by his strong language concern- 
 ing Judaists, that he had been himself accused 
 by tliem of conceding the necessity of circum- 
 cision, for example, in the case of Timothy, 
 and that he now proposes by one decisive 
 argument to prove the absurdity of the charge. 
 ' But as to m^'self, brethren, if it is circumci- 
 sion that I still preach, as I certainly did be- 
 fore my conversion, wh^' am I notwitlistanding 
 this persecuted?' For to my persecutors the 
 only stumbling-block pertaining to the cross, 
 or to the gospel, is its dispensing with obe- 
 dience to the law as a means of justification ; 
 and if I so preacli it as to include in it obe- 
 dience to the law as necessary to acceptance 
 with God, the stumbling-block is removed, 
 and their hostility to me becomes inexplic- 
 able. 
 
 12. I would that they were even cut off 
 which trouble you. The Greek interpreters 
 all understand thisof self-mutilation. "Would 
 that they who unsettle you would even mutil- 
 ate themselves." (Davidson.) So understood, 
 the language is an instance of just sarcasm. 
 Let those zealots for a fleshly rite who resort 
 to desperate misrepresentation in defense of 
 it, go the whole figure and make themselves 
 eunuchs, like the priests of Cj'bele. "Cir- 
 cumcision under the law and to the Jews, was 
 the token of a covenant. To the Galatians, 
 Under the Gospel Dispensation, it had no such 
 significance. It was merely a bodily mutila- 
 tion, as such differing rather in degree than 
 
 in kind from the terrible practices of the 
 heathen priests." (Lightfoot.) 
 
 13-15. Paul Exhorts them not to 
 Abuse their Christian Freedom by 
 Neglecting to Obey the Law of Love. 
 
 13. For, brethren, ye have been called 
 unto liberty. By the word 'for' this state- 
 ment is made to justify the sharp language of 
 the previous verse. 'I cannot, as you per- 
 ceive, look'upon these Judaistic "subverters," 
 who are creating dissension and bringing you 
 under a yoke of bondage, without deep indig- 
 nation ; for ye were called by the grace of 
 God unto freedom in Christ his Son.' Yet, 
 while justif^'ing all he had said against the 
 advocates of circumcision and the Jewish Law, 
 the apostle feels the need of cautioning the 
 brethren in Galatia against an abuse of their 
 Christian liberty. Perhaps he knew that some 
 had already begun to turn their liberty into 
 license; and, therefore, he adds, only use 
 not liberty for an occasion to the flesh. 
 Whether 'use' should be supplied in English 
 to bring out the full sense of the Greek, or 
 some other verb, like make, is somewhat 
 doubtful ; but looking at the Greek sentence, 
 we prefer 'make' (Troterre) : 'Make not your 
 freedom into an occasion for the flesh' — mean- 
 ing by 'the flesh' the entire sinful nature of 
 man. Thus the apostle " at once hastens, with 
 more than usual earnestness, to trace out the 
 ineffaceable distinction between true spiritual 
 freedom and a carnal and antinomian license." 
 (Ellicott. ) That 'the flesh' here means the 
 whole sinful nature of man is evident from 
 the following i)aragraph. (vcr. 16-J6.) But by 
 love serve one another. An exhortation 
 of deep and far-reaching import, reminding 
 us of a wonderful scene at the close of our 
 Lord's ministry, when he taught his disciples 
 to render the humblest service to one an- 
 other. See John 13 ; 4-16. The word trans- 
 lated 'serve,' signifies to render bondservice; 
 and as it is in the present tense, it denotes 
 continuous serving; so that the Revised Yer- 
 
68 
 
 GALATTANS. 
 
 [Ch. V. 
 
 14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, eren in 
 this; Ihou shall love tliy neighbour as thyself. 
 
 15 But if ye l>ite and devour oue another, take heed 
 that ye be not consumed one of another. 
 
 K; This 1 say tlieu, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall 
 not fultil the lu'sl of the flesh. 
 
 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the 
 Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one 
 to the other ; so that ye cannot do the things that ye 
 would. 
 
 14 For the ■vchole la* is fuMUed in one word, even 
 in this; Thou sbalt love thy neighijour as tby- 
 
 15 self. But if ye bite and devour one another, take 
 heeil that ye be not consumed one of another. 
 
 16 But 1 sav, Walk by the Spirit, and ve shall not 
 
 17 fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lustith 
 against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; 
 for these are contrary the one to the other; that ye 
 
 sion gives the sense correctly, ' Through love 
 be servants one to another.' ' You can do the 
 Immblest work with the utmost freedom of 
 spirit, if you do it for the benefit of your breth- 
 ren and under the blessed influence of love.' 
 No man ever perceived the beauty and energy 
 of love with a more distinct vision than the 
 writer of this Epistle. 
 
 14. For all the law is fulfilled in one 
 word — that is, by observing one precept. The 
 Greek verb is in the perfect tense, and there- 
 fore the apostle teaches that whoever has done 
 what is required by the single command which 
 he has in mind, has obeyed the whole law. Of 
 course, he does not intend to affirm that any one 
 has done this, but only that doing this involves 
 doing the rest. Even in this; thou shalt 
 love thy neighbour as thyself. See Lev. 
 19:18; Matt. 22:39; Luke 10:27; Kom. 
 13 : 9, 10. To obey this command one must 
 have perfect love to his neighbor, and such 
 love cannot exist in a heart that is not filled 
 with supreme love to God. The excellence 
 of the gospel is seen in this, that by it love to 
 God and man is implanted in the heart as it 
 never is by the claims of law ; so that by driv- 
 ing men from itself to Christ, for pardon and 
 peace, the law gets an honor and love that it 
 can obtain in no other way. As a rule, for 
 those who have begun to love God, the law is 
 not only holy, but also good ; while as a means 
 of salvation for sinners it is powerless. Com- 
 pare Kom. 7: 12; Gal. 3: 21. 
 
 15. But if ye bite and devour one an- 
 other, etc. " He says not simply bite, which 
 indicates sudden anger, but devour, which 
 implies continuance in an evil mind." Again, 
 " h^trife and contention are destruction to those 
 who introduce them, as well as to those who 
 welcome tliem." (Chrj-sostom.) The more 
 sacred and intimate the fellowship disturbed, 
 the more difficult is it to restore harmony. 
 " A brother offended is harder to be won than 
 a strong city ; and such contentions are like 
 
 the bars of a castle." (Pn.t . is ; I9, Rev. Ver.) But 
 
 there is some reason to believe that Paul, by 
 his prompt and powerful defense of the gos- 
 pel, together with his earnest delineation of a 
 true Christian life in contrast with a life of 
 sin, arrested the influx of error and restored 
 the churches to harmony in the truth. 
 
 16-26. Contrast Between a Life Con- 
 trolled BY THE Flesh and a Lifk Con- 
 trolled BY the Spirit: the Former 
 Unchristian, the Latter Christian. 
 
 16. This 1 say then — more exactly, Noiv 
 I say (Revised Version), or, mean. Walk 
 in the Spirit. Better, Walk by the Spirit 
 — that is, under the guiding impulse of 
 the Holy Spirit, and so in conformity with 
 his will. And ye shall not fulfil the 
 lust of the flesh. The double negative in 
 the Greek may be properly rendered, as in 
 the Revised Version, ye shall by no means 
 fulfil the lust of the flesh. The word 'flesh' 
 does not here signify the bodily part of man, 
 to the exclusion of his spirit, but his sinful 
 nature — that is, his entire nature before conver- 
 sion, and whatever is sinful in his nature after 
 conversion. According to Thayer's "Lexi- 
 con," it "denotes mere human nature, the 
 earthly nature of man apart from divine influ- 
 ence, and, therefore, prone to sin and opposed 
 to God." The word translated 'lust' signifies 
 'desire,' 'longing,' 'craving,' and especially', 
 ' desire for what is forbidden.' Compare Rom. 
 7 : 7, 8; James 1 : 14, 15. When, as in this 
 place, the context shows that it is used in the 
 latter sense, it may properly be translated 
 ' lust,' although the reader must bear in mind 
 that it has no special reference to sensual 
 craving. 
 
 17. For the flesh lusteth against the 
 Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; 
 and these are contrary the one to the 
 other. A confirmation of the foregoing 
 statement. The desire of man's heart before 
 conversion, and of his remaining evil nature 
 after conversion, is opposed to every impulse 
 of the Spirit, and in acting against the work 
 
Ch. v.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 69 
 
 18 Bui if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the 
 law. 
 
 19 Now the works of the flesh are manliest, which 
 are Uune, Adidtery, fornication, uucleanness, lascivious- 
 11 ess, 
 
 18 may not do the things that ye would. But if ye are 
 
 I'J led" by the Spirit, ye are nut under the law. Nuw the 
 
 works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, for- 
 
 of the Holy Spirit, may bo said to oppose tbo 
 Spirit liimself. Honoe the apostle adds the 
 sentence, 'and these are contra i-y tlie one to 
 the other.' According to the better textual 
 documents (K* B D* E F G against N<= A = 
 K L P), the true reading is ' for,' instead of 
 ' and.' 'The flesh lusts against the Spirit and 
 the Spirit against the flesli, because they are 
 contrary,' etc. So that ye cannot do the 
 things that ye would — or (Revised Version), 
 that ye may not do the things that ye ivould. 
 The probable meaning of the clause, when 
 compared with Rom. 7 : 15, 16, is that the 
 opposition of sinful desire arrests the better 
 choice 'so that' it is not carried into effect. 
 It will also be noticed that the verb 'lusteth ' 
 is not expressed after the word ' Spirit.' Many 
 interpreters would, therefore, supply a word 
 of similar import, but less associated with 
 evil, such as ' contends,' or ' strives.' Yet tliis 
 is both unnecessary and unnatural. Compare 
 Luke '22 : 15, " With desire I have desired to 
 eat this passover with you before I suffer." 
 As to the force of tlie Greek word tlva), trans- 
 lated 'so that,' see Buttmann's "Grammar," 
 239, who argues that it may be translated so 
 that in a number of passages. Winer, Meyer, 
 and Fritzsehe insist upon the telic sense. Dr. 
 Hackett maintains that the telic sense may be 
 retained here. "Tlie apostle predicates the 
 teleological aim here of the 'flesh' ((ripf), or 
 sinful principle in man, which, according to a 
 correct anthropology, is viewed as the ascend- 
 ant influence before the beginning of a new 
 life, and after that, as still striving to maintain 
 its ascendency." After having said that the 
 two principles are thus arrayed against each 
 other, he goes on to adjust the sequel of the 
 sentence to that posture of the conflict: " They 
 are opposed to each other, I say, and the dan- 
 ger is that you will remain under the old 
 domination— the flesh, in this struggle with 
 the Spirit, striving to bring it about that you 
 should not do the things which the Spirit has 
 taught you to approve." etc. Meyer and 
 Ellieott understand that each of these princi- 
 ple.'? strives against the other, that you should 
 n(.t do the things which you would do, or will. 
 In case you would do what is approved by the 
 
 Spirit, you are prevented by the flesh to the 
 extent of its power; and in case you would 
 do works of the flesh, you are prevented by 
 the Spirit's influence. This is certainly con- 
 ceivable, bearing in mind the porsonilication 
 of the flesh and the personality of the Sjiirit; 
 but it seems to me a less natural thought than 
 the one expressed by ' so that,' etc. 
 
 18. Bit if ye be led of the Spirit (are 
 led by the -S>i?-e7), ye are not under the law 
 — or, under law. For the article is wanting 
 in the original text, and need not here be sup- 
 plied in translation. In this verbe the apostle 
 declares that the influence of the Spirit is of 
 such a nature as to deliver one from bondage 
 to the law as a means of justification. Ani- 
 mated by that influence, he is truly free, and 
 does the will of God under the impulse of 
 love. Hence, the fact that one is led by the 
 Spirit renders it certain that he is not under 
 law. Moreover, it is evident from a compari- 
 son of this verse with ver. 16 and 17, that 
 the law is conceived of as in some way arous- 
 ing the selfish nature of man into controlling 
 action, while the Spirit inspires him with grati- 
 tude and benevolence. The former may beget 
 fear and remorse on the one hand, or self- 
 righteousness and pride on the other; but it 
 does not produce the fruit of trust or love or 
 personal devotion, while the latter produces 
 these, iind thereby weakens, if it does not de- 
 stroy, self-righteoiisness, pride, and fear. 
 
 19. Now the w^orks of the flesh are 
 manifest, which are these — or, 'of which 
 class are' the following. The apostle does 
 not aim to give a full list of sinful works, but 
 specimens which are well known to his read- 
 ers. This enumeration is translated more cor- 
 rectly in the Revised Version than in the 
 Common Version, thus: Fornication, iin- 
 cleanness, lascivionsness, idolatry, sorcery, 
 enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, 
 divisions, heresies, envyings, drunkenjtess, 
 revellings, and snch like — a black catalogue 
 of sins issuing from a selfish heart! Compare 
 the words of Jesus in Matt. 15 : 19, " For out 
 of the heart come forth evil thoughts, mur- 
 ders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false wit- 
 nes.s, railings: these are things which defile 
 
70 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. V. 
 
 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, | 20 nicationj uncleanness,lascivioiisness, idolatry, sorce- 
 
 wratb, strife, seditions, heresies, 
 
 21 Euvyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and 
 sucli like: of the which I tell you before, as 1 liave 
 also told you in time past, that they which do such 
 things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. 
 
 •i2 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long- 
 sutt'ering, gentleness, goodness, faith. 
 
 ry, enmities, strile, jealousies, wraths, factions, divi- 
 
 21 sions, parties, euvyings, drunkenness, revellings, 
 and such like: of the which I ' forewarn you, even 
 as I did ' forewarn you, that they who practise such 
 
 22 things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But 
 the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffer- 
 
 1 Or, tell you plainly. 
 
 the man." Bengel divides these sins into 
 those 'committed (1) with one's neiglibor; 
 (2) against God; (3) against one's neiglibor; 
 (4) on one's self.' liightfoot groups them in 
 the same way as (1) sensual passions — ' forni- 
 cation,' 'uncleanness,' 'licentiousness'; (2) 
 unlawful dealings in things spiritual — 'idol- 
 atry,' 'witchcraft'; (3) violations of hrotherly 
 love — 'enmities,' . . . 'murders'; {i) intem- 
 perate excesses — 'drunkenness,' 'revellings.' 
 The word 'fornication' appears to signify, in 
 this place, illicit sexual intercourse in the case 
 of those married or of those unmarried; 'un- 
 cleanness,' impurity of profligate living, in- 
 cliiding pederasty ; and 'lasciviousness,' open 
 wantonness of conduct, bold defiance of moral 
 order — for example, in the case of whoremong- 
 ers and harlots. ' Idolatry ' denotes the open 
 recognition and worship of false gods, and 
 'sorcery' the use of magical arts, many of 
 which were practiced in secret. The specifi- 
 cations following these need no explanation ; 
 thej' are sins which spring from selfishness 
 and produce contention, division, and weak- 
 ness in the churches. I would translate the 
 words 'enmities, strife, jealousy, wraths, in- 
 trigues, divisions, factions, envyings, murders, 
 drunkenness, revellings.' The word trans- 
 lated ' wraths ' appears to denote ' outbursts of 
 wrath." The last two nouns, 'drunkenness' 
 and 'revellings,' differ in that the latter is 
 more comj)rehensive in meaning. It gener- 
 ally includes the former, though it may be 
 
 sometimes used where there is no complete 
 intoxication. Of the which I tell you be- 
 fore, as I have also told you in tim.es 
 past (forewarn you, even as I did foreunirti 
 yon) : that they which do (practise^) such 
 things shall not inherit the kingdom of 
 God. 'Even as I did forewarn you' refers to 
 what he had said during his second visit to the 
 churches of Galatia, when some of these 'works 
 of the flesh ' had begun to appear among them. 
 'Shall not inherit,' etc. Whatever may be 
 the relation of men to the church, however 
 loud their profession of faith in Christ, they 
 will perish at last, if their works are such as 
 those just enumerated. Tliey that are of tlie 
 flesh cannot please God, nor can they "partake 
 of eternal salvation in the Messiah's king- 
 dom " ; for they are not sons of God through 
 faith in Christ Jesus, since the faith which 
 they profess to have does not work through 
 love. See ver. 6. 
 
 22. But the fruit of the Spirit. Sieffert 
 holds, against Mej-er, that "the collective 
 singular, 'fruit,' is intended to fix attention 
 on the inner unity of ' the fruit of the Spirit,' 
 as contrasted with 'the works of the flesh,' 
 which spring out of many difterent desires." 
 Is love, joy, peace, longsulTering, gentle- 
 ness, goodness, faith. The Revised Ver- 
 sion substitutes 'kindness' for 'gentleness,' 
 and ' faithfulness' for ' faith ' — in both CM.ses 
 an improvement : in the former, because the 
 Greek word (xpitrTOTin) signifies 'kindness' 
 
 1 The word for ' murders ' is not found in the Sinaitic 
 and Vatican MSS., or in five cursives. But it is in A 
 C D E FG K L P, and most cursives ; also in both forms 
 <if the Syriac, the Meniphitic, the Armenian, ^thiopic, 
 Gothic, and Vulgate Versions ; and is accepted by Laoh- 
 mann, Meyer, the Revisers. Compare Rom. 1 : 29. " The 
 fact, however, of the same alliteration occurring in an- 
 other epistle written about the same time, is rather in 
 its favor, and the omission in some texts may be due to 
 the carelessness of a copyist transcribing words so 
 closely resembling each other. The reading must, there- 
 fore, remain doubtful." (Lighlfoot.) 
 
 s A distinction ought to be made in translation between 
 
 jToi'eii' and irpaa-trtiv, though the words are of similar 
 meaning. " Roughly speaking, n-oien' may he said to an- 
 swer to the Latin /nrfr;'f, or the English do — rtpaaaeiv. to 
 agere, or English, praelwe. Tloinv, to designate perform- 
 ance ; wpo<T<Teii', intended, earnest, habitual performance. 
 IloieiV, to denote merely productive action ; -rpaaaav, 
 definitely directed action, rioieii', to point to an actual 
 result ; npatrafiv, to the scope and character of the re- 
 sult. In Attic, in certain connections the difference 
 between them is great; in others, hardly perceptible." 
 (Schmidt.) "The words are a.'sociated in John 3 : 20, 
 21; 5: 29; Acts 26 : 9, 10; Roui. 1:32; 2:3; 7:15, seq.; 
 13 : 1." (Thayer.) 
 
Ch. v.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 71 
 
 23 Meekness, temperance : against such there is no | 23 ing, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, raeeknesSj 
 law 
 
 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh 
 with the att'eetions and lusts. 
 
 2) If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the 
 Spirit. 
 
 26 Let us not be desirous of vainglory, provoking 
 one another, envying one another. 
 
 4 1 temperance: against such there is no law. And 
 they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified tlie 
 tle>h with the passions and the lusts thereof. 
 
 25 If we live by the .Spirit, by the Spirit let us also 
 
 26 walk. Let us not be vainglorious, provoking one 
 another, envying one auotlier. 
 
 1 Or, ael/'COHtrol. 
 
 or ' graciousness,' rather than 'gentleness,' 
 though gentleness nitiy be included in kind- 
 ness; and in the latter, because the context 
 requires us to think of a quality which has 
 respect to human relations. 
 
 23. Meekness, temperance. Self-control 
 is a better rendering of the Greek word for 
 'temperance.' If there be any special refer- 
 ence to tiioderatii>n in the use of food or drink, 
 this reference must be inferred from an as- 
 sumed contrast between this word and the 
 words 'drunkenness' and 'revellings' in ver. 
 21, and not from any such limitation in the 
 me-ining of the word itself. The most that 
 can safely be said is this, tbat self-control 
 fairly embraces thorough 'temperance' in the 
 use of food and drink. Neither food nor 
 drink of any kind should be used in such a 
 manner as to injure health of body or of 
 mind. Against such there is no law. They 
 are all good, and not evil. The law is for 
 them, not against them. " If ye are led by 
 the Spirit, ye are not under law." (ver. is.) 
 "Law is not made for a righteous man, but 
 for the lawless and disobedient," etc. (i ffm- 
 1:9,10.) Yet it approves all that is right, 
 though it cannot produce it in fallen man. 
 
 24. And they that are Christ's have 
 crucified the flesh with the affections 
 and lusts. The Revised Version is prefer- 
 able, And they that are of Christ Jesus have 
 crucified the flesh tvith the passions and the 
 lusts thereof. Yet the word 'thereof might 
 properlj' be stricken off, because unnecessary 
 to the sense and representing no word in the 
 original. The verb ' have crucified ' expresses 
 SI contpleted act, referring, without doubt, to 
 their conversion. At that time they died with 
 Christ that they might live unto God. See 
 2 : 19, 20; 3 : 26, 27. " To Christians ideally , 
 
 ci>nsidered, as here, this ethical mortification 
 of tlie flesh is something already accomplished 
 (compare Kom. G : 2-14); but in reality, it is 
 also renewed continually (Rom. 8:i3; Cui. 3:5), 
 though the latter fact is not mentioned in this 
 place." (Meyer.) 
 
 25. If we live in (or, by) the Spirit, let 
 us also walk in {by) the Spirit. Let the 
 outward life agree with the inward. If the 
 latter is moved and directed by the Spirit of 
 God, the' former should be controlled by the 
 same divine influence. But that is not an in- 
 fluence which operates without regard to 
 human freedom. No Christian will be kept 
 in the narrow way, unless it be by his own 
 consent and choice. The exhortation means 
 watchfulness, prayerful ness, and effort. The 
 Greek verb for 'walk' is not the same in this 
 verse and in ver. 16. The one used here 
 suggests the idea of an orderly procedure, 
 perhaps of moral and religious conduct regu- 
 lated by a settled purpose. 
 
 26. Let us not be desirous of vain- 
 glory, provoking one another, envying 
 one another. If we give to the Greek word 
 translated 'be' its usual signification, the first 
 part of this verse must be translated, 'Let us 
 not become vainglorious,' as if that were a sin 
 to which Christians were liable, but of which 
 the Galatians had not in any marked degree 
 been guilty. A conceited, vainglorious per- 
 son is certain to i)rovoke others to dislike and 
 criticize him. At the same time, he is liable 
 to be envious of those who receive the atten- 
 tion and respect which he imagines to be due 
 to himself. It is, therefore, very diflBcult to 
 preserve brotherly love in churches where 
 some are puffed up with pride, thinking of 
 themselves more highly than they ought to 
 think. See Rom. 12 : 3. 
 
72 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. VI. 
 
 CHAPTER VL 
 
 BRETHREN, if a man be overtaken in a f.,ult, ye 
 wliich are spiritual, restore sucli a one in the spirit 
 of uieekness; considering tliyself, lest tlioii also be 
 tfiiipted. 
 
 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the 
 law of Christ. 
 
 1 Brethren, even if a man be overtaken lin any 
 trespass, ye who are spiritual, restore such a one iu 
 a spirit of meekness ; looking to thyself, lest thou 
 
 2 also be tempted. Bear ye one another's burdens, 
 
 1 Or, by. 
 
 Ch. 6: "He adds in tlie last chapter several 
 general directions, siicli as relate, for example, 
 to the spirit with which Christitins should ad- 
 monish those who fall into sin, the patience 
 which they should exhibit toward each other's 
 faults, the duty of providing for the wants of 
 Christian teachers, and, in short, performing 
 unweariedly every good work, with the assur- 
 ance that in due time they should have their 
 reward, (i-io-) He warns them once more 
 against the sinister designs of those who were 
 so earnest for circumcision, holds up to their 
 view again the cross of Christ as that alone in 
 which men should glory, and closes with a 
 praj'er for them as those whom he would still 
 regard as brethren, (u-is.)" (Hackett.) 
 
 1-10. General Exhortatio>s and 
 "Warnings. 
 
 1. Brethren. This word must be regarded 
 as a spontaneous, unstudied expression of the 
 apostle's feeling to ward the Galatians. Though 
 heha'^ reproved and admonished themsharply, 
 he still loves them as brethren in the Lord, and 
 addresses them with deep affection. Thus love 
 pleads when argument is exhausted. If (Re- 
 vised Version, even if) a man be overtaken 
 in a fault. The meaning of the verb (jrpo- 
 Xriii<i>e^), translated 'be overtaken," is consid- 
 ered doubtful. It may signify (as (taTaAo/ajSavw, 
 in John 8:4),' be detected,' or, ' surprised ' — 
 that is, in the act of transgression. This in- 
 terpretation is approved by Ellicott, Light- 
 foot, and others. If correct, the case supposed 
 by the apostle is one which admits of no doubt 
 as to the offense — that is, as to the certainty of 
 its having been committed. Others believe 
 that the verb describes its subject as involved, 
 before he is fully aware of it, in transgression. 
 He is taken, when off his guard, by tempta- 
 tion ; and, before he clearly apprehends his 
 condition, lapses into wrongdoing; so that his 
 offense is less culpable than it would have 
 been had he acted deliberately. It is difficult 
 to decide which of these significations best 
 suits the context; but, on account of the pas- 
 
 sage in John, we prefer the former. The 
 offense referred to (jrapajTTOMa) is, "a lapse from 
 truth and uprightness." In the Revised Ver- 
 sion it is rendered 'trespass,' and Eritzsche 
 saj's that it differs "in figure," but not "in 
 force," from the Greek word {aixdpTrina), which 
 denotes a sinful deed. Ye which are spir- 
 itual. Thus the apostle assumes that there 
 were those in the churches of Galatia who 
 were led by the Spirit of God, and who, under 
 the influence of that Spirit, might deal wisely 
 with offenders. But he does not exhort those 
 who were unconscious of bearing 'the fruit of 
 the Spirit' (0:22. 23) to undertake this delicate 
 and difficult task of restoring a brother that 
 has been guilt}' of known sin. Restore such 
 a one in the spirit of meekness. The Re- 
 vised Version ' in a spirit of meekness ' answers 
 perfectly to the original. A spirit of meek- 
 ness is a disposition distinguished by that 
 quality and produced by the indwelling of 
 the Holy Spirit. See 5 : 23. A proud or con- 
 tentious spirit would utterly disqualify one 
 for the service contemplated bj' the ajiostle in 
 this exhortation. Considering thyself, lest 
 thou also be tempted. "The transition 
 from the plural to the singular gives the charge 
 a direct personal application: each one of jou 
 individually." (Lightfoot.) The word ' also' 
 shows that the ' fault,' or lapse into sin, spoken 
 of in the first clause, is occasioned b}' tempta- 
 tion, and that even spiritual men are liable to 
 be overcome by temptation. "Let him that 
 thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." 
 (1 Cor. 10: 12.) A consideration of one's own 
 weakness will prevent harsh dealing with an 
 offending brother. This general direction of 
 Paul is perfectly consistent with the more de- 
 tailed method of procedure laid down by 
 Christ in Matt. 18 : 15-18. The aim in both 
 cases is restoration, not excision ; though the 
 latter must follow if the former fails. 
 
 2. Bear ye one another's burdens, and 
 so fulfil the law of Christ. Not only should 
 Christians possess a sympathetic spirit which 
 
CiJ. VI ] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 73 
 
 3 For if a man think himself to be something, when 
 he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 
 
 4 But let every man prove his own work, and then 
 shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in 
 another. 
 
 5 For every man shall bear his own burden. 
 
 6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate 
 uut» him that leacheih in all good things. 
 
 3 and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if a man think- 
 eth himself to be something, when he is nothing, he 
 
 4 deceiveth himself. Kut let each man i)rove his own 
 work, and then shall he have his glorying in regard 
 
 5 of himself alone, and not of i his neighbour. l>"or 
 each man shall bear his own -burden. 
 
 6 Hut let him that is taught in the word communi- 
 
 1 6r. (A« other 2 Or, load. 
 
 enters into the condition and shares the sorrow 
 of a trespassing brother, but their mutual love, 
 sympathy, and helpfulness should embrace all 
 the cares and sorrows of the spiritual brother- 
 hood. The love of all the members of a Chris- 
 tian church to one another should be like that 
 which Christ has for them. For this evidently 
 is 'the law of Christ' referred to by tlie apos- 
 tle. "This is m^' commandment, tliat ye love 
 one another, even as I have loved you." (John 
 15: 12.) Compare 1 John 2 : 7-11. Though the 
 Fourth Gospel was not yet written, it is evi- 
 dent that Paul knew the substance of the 
 Lord's sweet and wonderful command to his 
 disciples. 
 
 3. For if a man think himself to be 
 sometliin§^, when he is nothing, he de- 
 ceiveth himself. This verse confirms the 
 preceding by showing the evils of an opposite 
 spirit and life. He that imagines himself to 
 be strong and able to stand alone, when in 
 fact he is weak in faith and love, deludes him- 
 self Conceit is not only un.sympathetic, it is 
 alsounihristian and delusive. The man whose 
 piety is not in his life, but in his imagination, 
 is subject to a fatal but cherished error. Faith 
 that does not work by love will not be recog- 
 nized as genuine at the last day. 
 
 4. But let every man prove his own 
 work. As 'but' indicates, the proving of 
 orie's own work, here recommended, is neg- 
 lected by tiie man who thinks that he is 
 sometiiing when he is nothing. "By their 
 fruits ye shall know them" is a rule that can 
 be applied to ourselves as well as to our neigh- 
 bors. And it is easier for a Christian to test 
 his work by the law of love than it is for him 
 to test his whole spiritual condition by that 
 law. For the work is a definite outcome from 
 his inner life; it is positive, voluntary, and in 
 a sense visible; he can look at it, measure it, 
 weigh it, prove its quality, and go back with 
 it as a lamp into the still, obscure depths of 
 the soul which he could scarcely enter without 
 it. Compare 1 Cor. 11 ; 31. The remainder 
 
 of the verse is more accurately rendered in 
 the Bible Union Revision : ".^nt/ then shall 
 he have [thel ground of glorying in reference 
 to himself, and not to another.'^ For the 
 Greek word (Kavxi)ti-aL) has the article, and does 
 not signify 'rejoicing,' but rather ' the ground 
 of glorying'; here, the ground of glorying 
 which the character of his own work furnishes. 
 Compare the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 4:5: 
 "And tlven shall every man have his j)raise 
 from God" ; literally, "the praise from God" 
 — that is, the praise due to each. But in this 
 place the apostle has in mind what a Christian 
 man should deem an occasion for exultant 
 thankfulness; it is the service or suflering 
 which, by the grace of God, he is himself en- 
 abled to bear; it is his work tested by the law 
 of love, and not his work as compared with 
 'the other' Christian's work, which may be of 
 the poorest quality. Ellicott's interpretation 
 is excellent: "If any one wishes to find mat- 
 ter for boasting, let it be truly searched for in 
 his own actions, and not derived from a con- 
 trast of his own fancied virtues with the faults 
 of others." Compare 2 Cor. 10 : 17; 11 : 30; 
 12 : 9. In the next verse is astatement of the 
 reason for this method of proving one's own 
 work. 
 
 5. For every man shall bear his own 
 burden. Dr. Hackott proposes to translate 
 this verse as follows: 'For each one shall 
 carry his own load,' remarking that "the 
 burdens which the apostle urges his readers to 
 'bear' (ver. 2) are the faults and offenses of 
 others, toward which we are required to be 
 tolerant, charitable; and the 'load' which 
 every one has to 'carry' is that of his own 
 accountability for all his sins and deficiencies, 
 be it as it may with otliers, whether they are 
 more or less guiltj"^ than himself" 
 
 6. But. This particle is omitted in the 
 Common Version. It belongs, however, to 
 the text and must be considered in the inter- 
 pretation. Giving it, as usual, a slightly ad- 
 versative sense, the connection of thought is 
 
74 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. VL 
 
 7 Be not deceived ; God is not mocked : for wliatso- 
 ever a man soweth, tliat shall he also reap. 
 
 8 For lie that suweth to his flesh shall of the flesh 
 reap corruption ; but he that soweth to the rfpirit shall 
 of the Spirit reap life everlasting. 
 
 7 cate unto him that teacheth in all good things. Be 
 not deceived ; (jod is not mocked : for whatsoever 
 
 8 a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that 
 soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap 
 corruption ; but he that soweth unto the Spirit 
 
 as follows: 'But,' though in the matter re- 
 ferred to, each one will carry his own load, it 
 should not be so in everything, let him that 
 is taught in the word communicate unto 
 him that teacheth, in all good things. 
 A more literal rendering would be: 'let him 
 that is taught ... go shares with him that 
 teacheth in all good things.' Compare 1 Cor. 
 9: 11: "If we have sown unto you spiritual 
 things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your 
 carnal things?" If the word translated 'let 
 him participate with ' [KoivuiveCTm) is pressed to 
 its utmost extent, it may be taken to mean 
 that members of a Christian church should 
 considertheir property as a possession common 
 to themselves and their religious teachers. 
 But this cannot be the apostle's meaning. All 
 that his words imply is that the laborer is 
 worthy of his hire, that one who gives his 
 time and strength to the religious instruction 
 of others should receive from them the worldly 
 things necessary to health and appropriate to 
 one in his condition. See 1 Thess. 2:6,9; 
 Phil. 4 : 10-18 ; 1 Tim. 5 : 17, 18. Some have 
 supposed that 'in all good things' must refer 
 to spiritual possessions, and that the apostle 
 exhorts the people who are still in need of re- 
 ligious instruction to be partakers in all divine 
 knowledge with their teachers, by eagerly 
 listening to their words and becoming familiar 
 with all they know. But this thought is less 
 suited to the context than the other. For the 
 exhortations of the preceding paragraph show- 
 that the Galatians werfe deficient in mutual 
 love, sympathy, and helpfulness, and these 
 deficiencies are closely allied to neglect of 
 those who served them in the gospel. Com- 
 pare also the use of the same verb in Phil. 
 4 : 15 and Kom. 12 : 13. In the former, Paul 
 saj's that "no church communicated with me 
 as concerning giving and receiving but ye 
 only"; and in the latter, "distributing (com- 
 municating) to the necessities of the saints." 
 Compare 1 Cor. 9 : 11. It is also said that all 
 the Greek Fathers who interpret the passage 
 give it the meaning adopted by us. 
 
 The apostle proceeds now to enforce what he 
 has just said by an appeal to the divine law of 
 retribution, thus taking up again from an- 
 
 other point of view, and with a far-reaching 
 glance into the future, the thought of ver. 4. 
 
 7. Be not deceived. Paul uses the same 
 admonition elsewhere, with reference to what 
 immediately follows it. See 1 Cor. 6:9; 
 15 : 33. So also here. God is not mocked 
 — that is, with impunity. Contemptuous treat- 
 ment of him is sure to bring evil on those who 
 are guilty of it. The very laws of their nature 
 are his servants, doing his will. Yet every 
 act of sin expresses contempt for his being, 
 authority, and judgment. It will therefore 
 bring upon the sinner a punishment answer- 
 ing to his sin. For whatsoever a man 
 soweth, that shall (or, will) he also reap. 
 This is one of the profoundest testimonies of 
 Scripture as to the moral government of God. 
 There is nothing arbitrary in that govern- 
 ment. Retribution will be proportioned to 
 sin, and will be seen to grow out of it with a 
 terrible certainty. " They would none of my 
 counsel, they despised all my reproof. There- 
 fore shall they eat of the fruit of their own 
 way, and be filled with their own devices." 
 (Prnv. 1 :3o, 31.) But the Same principle obtains 
 in the direction of good as well as of evil. 
 
 8. For he that soweth unto his {own. 
 Revised Version) flesh shall of the flesh 
 reap corruption. By 'his own flesh' is 
 meant his own sinful nature, and by 'sowing 
 unto' it must be meant making it the seed 
 plot or ground which he cultivates, and from 
 which his life proceeds; in other words, it is 
 suffering his sinful nature to rule his conduct 
 — nay, it is adopting its influence as the rule 
 of his life. And, therefore, the harvest is 
 'corruption,' moral worthlessness and decay, 
 the ruin of soul and body forever. But he 
 that soweth to the Spirit shall of the 
 Spirit reap life everlasting. Paul does 
 not say 'to his own Spirit,' thus setting the 
 higher principles and powers of man's nature 
 over against the lower, and tracing the har- 
 vest of eternal life to man himself; but he 
 says, ' to the Spirit,' thus testifying that a true 
 Christian counts all his right-living a fruit of 
 divine grace in his soul. He yields himself to 
 the influence of the Holy Spirit, and strives 
 with that Spirit to overcome and destroy the 
 
Ch. VI.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 75 
 
 9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due 
 season we sliutl reap, if we faint not 
 
 10 As we have therelore opportunity, let us do good 
 unto all mtn, especially uulo them who are of the 
 household of faitli. 
 
 11 Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you 
 wiih mine own hand. 
 
 y shall of the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not 
 be weary in well-doing; for in due season we shall 
 
 10 reap, if we faint not. .So then, 'as we have oppor- 
 tunity, let us work that which is good toward all 
 men, and especially toward them that are of the 
 household of the faith. 
 
 11 See with how large letters I 2 write unto you with 
 
 1 Or, since 'i Ur, have i 
 
 influence of the flesh. And the harvest is 
 'everhisting (or, eternal) life'! Not merely 
 endless existence in some unknown condition, 
 — out of harmony, perhaps, with God and his 
 universe, — but life, full, free, pure, joyous, 
 progressive, in fellowship with God, and at 
 home with all his friends; this, and whatever 
 better is conceivable, is embraced in the mean- 
 ing of 'eternal life,' as used by the sacred 
 writers. 
 
 9. And let us not be weary in well 
 duins:; Air in due season we shall reap, 
 if we faint not. ' In due season ' — in its 
 own tittiiig time, we shall be put in possession 
 of this eternal life. Let us not, then, faint in 
 the way. The words remind us of the apos- 
 tle's testimony respecting himself not far 
 from the time when this letter was written. 
 "Wherefore we faint not; but though our 
 outward man is decaying, yet our inward 
 man is renewed day by day. For our light 
 afiliction, which is for the moment, worketh 
 for us more and more exceedingly an eternal 
 weight of glory," etc. (acnr.i; le-is.) 
 
 10, As we have therefore opportunity, 
 etc. Here again, as in a great majority of 
 instances where they difl:er, the Kevised Ver- 
 sion is more accurate than the Common Ver- 
 sion. So then, as we have opportunity, let us 
 work that which is good toward all men, and 
 especially toioard them that are of the house- 
 hold of the faith. 'So then' (apa ovv) is an 
 expression peculiar to Paul : the fortner show- 
 ing that the following words agree with some- 
 thing just said, and the latter, that they are a 
 conclusion from that something, 'accordingly 
 therefore.' ' As we have opportunity ' — when- 
 ever we have a suitable occasion. 'Let us 
 work that which is good.' It is desirable to 
 translate the verb here used ' work,' in order 
 to distinguish it from another, which must be 
 translated 'do' (epya^onoi, 'work'; woie'w, 'do'). 
 'Toward all men.' The apostle teaches the 
 same doctrine as his Lord, the doctrine of uni- 
 versal philanthropy and, as far as possible, 
 of universal beneficence. See 1 Tim. 3 : 1-4 ; 
 
 Matt. 5 : 44-48 ; 22 : 39 ; Luke 10 : 29-37. The 
 'opportunity' of doing good to foreigners and 
 strangers is comparatively rare, but the dispo- 
 sition to do them good may be constant. More- 
 over, it is well to bear in mind that facilities 
 of travel and intercourse, are rapidly multi- 
 plying the opportunities which Christians have 
 of doing good to all men. 'And especially 
 unto them who are of the household of 
 faith.' Thus all believers in Christ are repre- 
 sented as belonging to one family, and are 
 urged to cultivate a family aflection by ren- 
 dering assistance to one another. In this 
 respect also, the apostle simply reiterates the 
 teaching of his Lord. His exhortation is but 
 the statement, in another and practical form, 
 of the Saviour's 'new commandment,' which 
 was, at the same time, as old as the spiritual 
 nature of man. For that those who are one 
 in spirit and aim and hope should be bound 
 together by special affection, and should make 
 special efforts to benefit one anotlier, is natu- 
 ral, inevitable. The extraordinary love of 
 the early Christians to one another was a sur- 
 prise to the heathen, and was, in many cases, 
 the principal thing which recommended the 
 new religion to their attention, and compelled 
 them to see in it a beneficent power. 
 
 With this beautiful sentiment, the apostle 
 finishes the main body of his Epistle to the 
 Galatians. All that remains is an earnest 
 resume of what he has said, a brief reference 
 to himself, and a final benediction. 
 
 11-16. Brief Reoapitulation. 
 
 11. Ye see how large a letter. Better, 
 See with how large letters I have written 7into 
 you vnth mine own hand. "If we accept the 
 results of the present exegesis," says Dr. 
 Hackett, " we must translate in this way . . . 
 There is a harmony between this verse, as thus 
 correctly understood, and 2Thess. 3 : 17, which 
 may be worth pointing out. In the Epi-^tle to 
 the Thessalonians, Paul speaks of tlie salutti- 
 tion there as added by his own hand, and as 
 being a sign (ariiitlov) or attestation of the gen- 
 uineness of the letter — such, in fact, as he 
 
76 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. VI. 
 
 12 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the 
 flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest 
 tliey should sutl'er persecution lor the cross of Christ. 
 
 1,J For neither tney themselves who are circumcised 
 keep the law ; but de^ire to have you circumcised, thai 
 I hey may glory in your tiesh. 
 
 12 mine own hand. As many as desire to make a fair 
 show in the tiesh, they compel you to be circum- 
 cised : only that they may not be persecuted ' for 
 
 13 the cross of (. hrist. l-'or not even they who - re- 
 ceive circumcision do theiuselves keep ^tlie law; 
 but they desire to have you circumcised, that ihty 
 
 1 Or, by reason of 2 Some uucient auiboi-icies read Aave 6ee» circumcised 3 Or, u law. 
 
 generally inserted in his epistles, and which 
 consisted usually of a few words written by 
 himself. His mode of referring to this mark 
 or sign, so I write (outco -ypdi^ai), shows tliat it 
 was some peculiarity b3' which his hand Avas 
 readily distinguished from that of the ordi- 
 nary amanuensis. That peculiarity, as appears 
 from the epithet (irj)Ai/cois. how great) in our 
 epistle, was the size of the written characters 
 or letters, for which (oiiru ypd^ia, so I virite) he 
 was well known. Whether Paul wrote the 
 whole Epistle with his own hand, or the last 
 verses only; whether he wrote in so peculiar 
 a way from want of practice, and hence, awk- 
 wardness; and whether he alludes to the 
 matter because he would authenticate the 
 letter, or to remind the Galatians of his ear- 
 nestness and painstaking in their behalf, are 
 questions which do not affect the translation," 
 and were not, therefore, considered by Dr. 
 Hackett in the article from which this extract 
 is made. But in the American Edition of 
 Smiths "Bible Dictionary," he remarks: 
 "The rendering of the Authorized Version 
 — "How large a letter I have written with 
 mine own hand (Gai. 6: ii)— might lead us to 
 suppose that in that instance, at least, he do- 
 parted from his usual practice. But the 
 correct translation removes that impression, 
 showing that the remark applies rather to a 
 few words or verses only of the letter as the 
 customary token of authenticity." (Page 759. ) 
 12. As many as desire to make a fair 
 show in the flesh. ' In the flesh ' here means 
 in matters pertaining to the physical nature 
 and outward life. Ritualism was the sphere 
 in which they sought to shine. The forms of 
 godliness were more to them than the reality. 
 And underneath their zeal for Jewish cere- 
 monies was a desire to be considered very 
 religious themselves — at least, in the eyes of 
 their countrymen. Th-ey constrain (or, 
 compel) you to be circumcised. Of course, 
 l)y insisting that without circumcision men 
 could not be saved. In so far as this convic- 
 tion could be implanted in the minds of the 
 Galatians, they would be compelled by it to 
 
 submit to the Jewish ritual, and especially to 
 the decisive initiatory act. Lest they should 
 sufl'er persecution for (or, Only that they 
 may not be persecuted for) the cross of 
 Christ. These Judaizing teachers were, 
 therefore, men who claimed to be Christians, 
 and who were influenced to do as they did by 
 a strong desire to avoid the reproach and per- 
 secution which the Jews directed, with all 
 bitterness, against those who forsook the law 
 of Moses to trust in the cross of Christ for 
 salvation. According to the inspired judg- 
 ment of Paul, they were influenced by a desire 
 to stand well with their countrymen, and es- 
 pecially' by a desire to escape persecution from 
 them. Thus the apostle puurs a flo(jd of light 
 upon the motives of these Judaizing teachers. 
 In the next verse, he justifies this judgment in 
 respect to their motives by an appeal to one 
 feature of their conduct. 'For the cross' (tw 
 o-Tavpiu) is used to express the occasion or reason 
 of the persecution. Compare Eoni. 11 : 20, 
 30 and 2 Cor. 2 : 13, and Winer p. 21G<=. 
 
 13. For neither they themselves, etc. 
 Better : For not even do they themselves viho 
 receive circitnicision keep the laiv. Two ques- 
 tions must here be answered : 1. In what tense 
 is the participle, in the present (n-cpiTtfii'OMei'oi, 
 who receive circumcision) or in the perfect 
 (TreptreTiiijjjieVot) ? The rcasons which make for 
 the opinion that it is present are: (1) That 
 it is the more difficult reading. (2) That it is 
 fairly well attested; namely, by B (F G) L, 
 and many cursives. For the former reason 
 chiefly we feel constrained to look upon the 
 present tense as probably genuine, and the 
 perfect as a correction. But who are intended 
 by those 'who receive circumcision' — the 
 Gentile Christians or the Judaizing teachers? 
 If the former are intended, we must suppose 
 that some of the Galatian Christians were 
 already submitting to circumcision, but with- 
 out keeping the law in all respects, or even 
 expecting to keep it. But this is scarcely 
 probable. It would have been an illogical 
 and untenable position for sincere men. Be- 
 sides, the subject of this clause is evidently 
 
Ch. VI.] 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 77 
 
 14 But God forbid that I should glury save in tlie 
 cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is 
 crucified unto me, und I unto the world. 
 
 15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth 
 any thing, nor iiucircuiucision, but a new creature 
 
 16 And <is many as walk according to this rule, peace 
 be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. 
 
 14 may glory in your flesh. But far be it from me to 
 glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 through • which the world hath been crucilied unto 
 
 15 me, and 1 unto the world, tor neither is (•ircuin- 
 cision any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new 
 
 16 -creature. And as many as shall walk by this rule, 
 peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel 
 of God. 
 
 1 Or, whom 2 Or, creation. 
 
 the subject of the next chiuse, and the subject 
 of that clause must be the Judaizing teachers. 
 The Greek expression 'who receive circum- 
 cision ' (oi TrepiTejivo/oiet'oi) denotes the party 
 practicing and advocating circumcision ; and 
 the present participle is used to describe their 
 conduct in its present moral effect. Yet they 
 do not keep the law in all its parts themselves. 
 But they desire to have you circum- 
 cised, that they may glory in your flesh. 
 For bj' making proselytes to Judaism they 
 would gain the approval of their countrymen, 
 without renouncing their confidence in Christ. 
 The mere outward conformity of Gentile 
 Christians to the Jewish Law in the initiatory 
 rite, through their influence, would furnish 
 them matter for boasting among the Jews, 
 something to wliich they could appeal as evi- 
 dence of their fidelity to the law. Thus they 
 were selfish and hypocritical, seeking their 
 own ends while professing to seek for the sal- 
 vation of the Gentiles. Certainly the Gala- 
 tians would do themselves irreparable harm 
 if they should give heed to the counsels of 
 such men. 
 
 14. But God forbid that I should (far 
 be it from me to) glory, save in the cross 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom 
 {through wliich) the world is {hath been) 
 crucified unto me, and I unto the Avorld. 
 The expression ^far be it ' f/ii>i yevoiro) is alwa3-s 
 employed by the apostle to declare his horror 
 at or repugnance to some doctrine or act. So 
 here, the thought of glorying in anything save 
 the cross of Christ is represented as shocking 
 to his mind. And by 'the cross of Christ ' he 
 certainly means the propitiatory death of the 
 Redeemer. In that he was ready to glory and 
 exult forever, but in nothing else. In that 
 was to be found pardon and peace, victory 
 over sin, and eternal life in the age to come. 
 There is a slight ambiguity in the word trans- 
 lated 'which,' as the form of the Greek rela- 
 tive must be the same whether it refers to ' the 
 cross' or to the ' Lord Jesus Christ.' Indeed, 
 
 the same prououn would be used if Paul in- 
 tended it to represent the complex idea of 
 'the cross of Christ.' Perhaps we cannot do 
 better than to give it this wider reference, and 
 if so the rendering of the Revised Version 
 'through which' is correct. It was then 
 through the propitiatory death of Christ upon 
 the cross that Paul felt himself to be dead 
 unto the world, and the world dead unto him. 
 By this double expression he seeks to empha- 
 size his utter abandonment of sinful aims, his 
 entire separation from all that does not belong 
 to Christ, his profound indiflerence and even 
 opposition to every ceremonial which turned 
 him away from the Lord Jesus. And as a 
 reason for this he adds the following state- 
 ment : 
 
 15. For in Christ Jesus neither circum- 
 cision availeth anything, nor uncircum- 
 cision, but a new creature (or, creation). 
 Why then does the apostle oppose circumcision 
 so earnestly? Because it was insisted upon as 
 a means of acceptance with God, as one of the 
 legal works on which salvation depends, — 
 though it has no power to give the new life in 
 Christ which is tlie beginning and the pledge 
 of eternal peace. He therefore puts it on the 
 same level with uncircumcision, which no 
 Jewish or Gentile convert was foolish enough 
 to iiTiHgine a means of acceptance with God. 
 In fact, both Jews and Gentiles were con- 
 demned by the Divine Law which they had 
 broken, and their only prospect of recovery 
 was through faith in Christ. A new creation 
 is the one thing needful to a sinner. A new 
 birth through the power of tlie Holy Spirit, 
 bj' which he enters on a life of love, joy, peace, 
 longsuffering, kindness, goodness, fidelity, 
 meekness, self-control, is the only means of 
 justification. And this is a new creation : not 
 a shoot from the old sinful nature, but a holy 
 seed implanted by the Sprit of God and nour- 
 ished by his grace. 
 
 16. And as many as walk (or, shall iralk) 
 by this rule, peace be on them, and 
 
78 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 [Ch. VI. 
 
 17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I 
 bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus. 
 
 IS Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be 
 with your Spirit. Amen. 
 
 17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I 
 bear branded on my body the marks of Jesus. 
 
 18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your 
 spirit, brethren. Amen. 
 
 mercy, and upon the Israel of God. 
 
 'This rule,' or canon, is the principle just 
 stated (ver. 15) that everything depends on a 
 new creation in Christ Jesus. And if we adopt 
 the reading 'shall walk,' we see that Paul 
 recognizes the necessity of abiding in the truth 
 and acting in harmony with it. He docs not 
 invoke the peace of God upon those that are 
 now walking bj^ this rule, or that have ac- 
 cepted it hitherto, but upon such as continue 
 to the end in such a course. And by ' the 
 Israel of God ' he means without doubt the 
 true Israel, those who are sons of God through 
 faith in his Son, whether of Jewish or Gentile 
 descent after the flesh. 
 
 17-18. Personal Kequest and Benedic- 
 tion. 
 
 17. From henceforth let no man trouble 
 me. That is, by calling in question my apos- 
 tolic authority or by perverting my gospel. 
 The words may be literally rendered : Hence- 
 forth let no one prepare for me heavy labors, 
 or troubles. For Paul was often oppressed 
 by the care of all the churches, and especially 
 when any of them were rent by factions, or 
 were in danger of being led away from the 
 truth. Such conditions imposed heavy bur- 
 dens on him, filled his spirit with anxiety, and 
 would have been insupportable but for the 
 strength which Christ imparted to him. (Pim. 
 4 : 13.) For I bear in my body — or, For I 
 bear branded on my body the marks of Jesus. 
 
 (Kevised Version.) The pronoun 'I' is em- 
 phatic, implying that this was not true of 
 Judaizing teachers who had impeached his 
 authority and attempted to render his work 
 vain. Moreover, he appeals to the scars which 
 were in his body as signs of the persecution 
 which he had suffered for Christ's sake, and 
 as brand-marks declaring that he was Christ's 
 bondservant. "The marks attested who the 
 apostle's Master was." (Ellicott.) "Jesus is 
 my Master, my Protector. His brand is 
 stamped on my body. I bear this badge of 
 an honorable service." (Lightfoot.) See John 
 15:20; 16:2; 2 Tim. 3 : 12; 2 Cor. 4 : 10; 
 11 : 23. 
 
 18. Brethren, the grace of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, etc. The grace of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. 
 Amen. (Revised Version.) The onlj^ difference 
 between the Common Version and the Revised 
 Version is in the position of the word 'brethren.' 
 In the original it stands at the close of the sen- 
 tence, "an unusual and emphatic position; com- 
 pare Philemon 7." "Thus," saysBengel, "the 
 severity of the whole Epistle is softened." 
 Note also the benediction itself, which directs 
 the minds of his readers to 'the grace of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ' as the sum of all good. 
 And then with the ratifying 'Amen' the great 
 apostle commits this wonderful Epistle to some 
 faithful messenger, who will bear it quickly to 
 the churches of Galatia. 
 
^ . ■^- 
 
 ^- iM 
 
 Date Due 
 
 .^ V 
 
 'aMMwBiHBMiMi ^kb,^ 
 
 
 ^ ^ -M >-■ 
 
 M- -rM 
 
 i^ :m 
 
« X 
 
 ,»■„ % » y 
 
 > 
 
 jf r 
 
 ••' > 
 
 j» *• V .»'■ ir > 
 
 > # Jr JT >- 
 
BS2341 -^512 V 5 ^^^ 
 
 Commentary on the ep^t 
 
 Pnnceton Theological Sem,nary_bpe^^,,,,, ,,„,,„ 
 
 1 1012 00056 0617^