CHAPTER II.] HOMILIES ON GALATIANS. 21 resolved the matter to a necessary absurdity. And mark how earnestly and strongly he argues. For if, he says, it behooved us not to abandon the Law, and we have so abandoned it for Christ s sake, we shall be judged. Where fore do you urge this upon Peter, who is more intimately acquainted with it than any one? Hath not God declared to him, that an uncir- cumcised man ought not to be judged by cir cumcision ; and did he not in his discussion with the Jews rest his bold opposition upon the vision which he saw ? Did he not send from Jerusalem unequivocal decrees upon this sub ject ? Paul s object is not therefore to correct Peter, but his animadversion required to be addressed to him, though it was pointed at the disciples ; and not only at the Galatians, but also at others who labor under the same error with them. For though few are now circum cised, yet, by fasting and observing the sabbath with the Jews, they equally exclude themselves from grace. If Christ avails not to those who are only circumcised, much more is peril to be feared where fasting and sabbatizing are observed, and thus two commandments of the Law are kept in the place of one. And this is aggravated by a consideration of time : for they so acted at first while the city and temple and other institutions yet existed ; but these who with the punishment of the Jews, and the des truction of the city before their eyes, 1 observe more precepts of the Law than the others did, what apology can they find for such observance, at the very time when the Jews themselves, in spite of their strong desire, cannot keep it? Thou hast put on Christ, thou hast become a member of the Lord, and been enrolled in the heavenly city, and dost thou still grovel in the Law ? How is it possible for thee to obtain the kingdom ? Listen to Paul s words, that the observance of the Law overthrows the Gospel, and learn, if thou wilt, how this comes to pass, and tremble, and shun this pitfall. Wherefore dost thou keep the sabbath, and fast with the Jews ? Is it that thou fearest the Law and abandonment of its letter ? But thou wouldest not entertain this fear, didst thou not disparage faith as weak, and by itself powerless to save. A fear to omit the sabbath plainly shows that you fear the Law as still in force ; and if the Law is needful, it is so as a whole, not in part, nor in one commandment only ; and if as a whole, the righteousness which is by faith is little by little shut out. If thou keep the sab bath, why not also be circumcised ? and if cir cumcised, why not also offer sacrifices ? If the Law is to be observed, it must be observed as a whole, or not at all. If omitting one part makes you fear condemnation, this fear attaches equally to all the parts. If a transgression of the whole is not punishable, much less is the transgression of a part ; on the other hand, if the latter be punishable, much more is the former. But if we are bound to keep the whole, we are bound to disobey Christ, orby obedience to Him become transgressors of the Law. If it ought to be kept, those who keep it not are transgressors, and Christ will be found to be the cause of this transgression, for He annulled the Law as regards these things Himself, and bid others annul it. Do you notunderstandwhat these Judaizers are compassing? They would make Christ, who is to us theAuthor of righteousness, the Author of sin, as Paul says, "Therefore Christ is the minister of sin." Having thus reduced the proposition to an absurdity, he had nothing further to do by way of overthrowing it, but was satisfied with the simple protestation, Ver. 17. "God forbid:" for shamelessness and irreverence need not be met by processes of reasoning, but a mere protest is enough. Ver. 18. "For if I build up again those things which I destroyed, I prove myself a transgressor." 2 Observe the Apostle s discernment; his oppo nents endeavored to show, that he who kept not the Law was a transgressor, but he retorts the argument upon them, and shows that he who did keep the Law was a transgressor, not merely of faith, but of the Law itself. "I build up again the things which I destroyed," that is, the Law ; he means as follows : the Law has confessedly ceased, and we have aban doned it, and betaken ourselves to the salvation which comes of faith. But if we make a point of setting it up again, we become by that very act transgressors, striving to keep what what God has annulled. Next he shows how it has been annulled. Ver. 19. "For P through the Law died unto the Law." This may be viewed in two ways ; it is either the law of grace which he speaks of, for he is wont to call this a law, as in the words, " For the law of the Spirit of life made me free: " (Rom. viii : 2.) or it is the old Law, of which he says, thatby theLaw itself hehasbecomedead to theLaw. That is to say, the Law itselfhas taught me no longer to obey itself, and therefore if Ido so, I shall be transgressing even its teaching. 4 1 [The Epistle to the Galatians was written in the year A. D. 56 or 57 and the destruction of Jerusalem occurred in A. D. 70.-G. A.J 3 ["I myself (Paul now politely chooses the first person but means Peter) stand convicted of transgression if I build again (as thou dost now at Antioch) the very law of Moses which I pulled down (as thou didst at Ca;sarea by divine command and at first at Antioch) and thus condemn my own former conduct." Schaft in Pof.Com.G. A.) 3 [ eyu yap In my case the process has been this, using his own experience. G.A ] 4 [" This second interpretation of Chrysostom is undoubtedly the correct one (though he errs in elucidating the relation of iia by referring to Dent, xviii: 15.) comp. Rom. vii: 4, 6 ; The law itself led him to Christ, by developing the sense of sin and the need of redemption." Schaff in Pop. Com. G. A.]