CHAPTER II.] COMMENTARY ON GALATIANS. are informed of thee, that thou teachest to for sake the law." (Actsxxi: 20, et seq.) Since then they were offendedhedid notcondescend to come forward publicly and declare what his preaching was, but he conferred privately with those who were of reputation before Barnabas and Titus, that they might credibly testify to his accusers, l that the Apostles found no dis crepancy in his preaching, but confirmed it. The expression, "those that were of repute," (r?9 doxooaiv~) doesnotimpugn the realityoftheir greatness ; for he says of himself, And I also seem (f5ox) to have the Spirit of God," there by not denying the fact, but stating it modestly. And here the phrase implies his own assent to the common opinion. Ver. 3. " But not even Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, 2 was compelled to be cir cumcised." What means, "being a Greek?" Of Greek extraction, and not circumcised ; for not only did I so preach but Titus so acted, nor did the Apostles compel him to be circumcised. A plain proof this that the Apostles did not con demn Paul s doctrine or his practice. Nay more, even the urgent representations of the adverse party, who were aware of these facts, did not oblige the Apostles to enjoin circumcis ion, as appears by his own words, Ver. 4. " And that because of the false brethren, privily brought in." Here arises a very important question, Who were these false brethren ? 3 If the Apostles permitted circumcision at Jerusalem, why are those who enjoined it, in acccordance with the Apostolic sentence, to be called false brethren ? First ; because there is a difference between commanding an act t be done, and allowing it after it is done. He who enjoins an act, does it with zeal as necessary, and of primary impor tance ; but he who, without himself command ing it, alloweth another to do it who wisnes yields not from a sense of its being necessary but in order to subserve some purpose. We have a similar instance, in Paul s Epistle to the* Corinthians, in his command to husbandsand wives to come together again. To which, that he might not be thought to be legis lating for them, he subjoins, "But this I say by way of permission, not of commandment." (i Cor. vii : 5.) For this was not a judgment 1 [That is, that Barnabas and Titus as witnesses of the proceed ings might testify to the Judaizing teachers everywhere, &C.-G.A.] 2 [Being " a Greek ; " Lightfoot says this is a "causal" partici- ~>ial clause giving the "reason" why Titus was not circumcised ; tnat i itus was circumcised out not compelled to DC. J IB nuw- ever cannot be held in view of the context and the position of the words in the sentence. G. A.] 1 ["These were formerly Pharisees (Acts xv : 5.) and weresti so in spirit although they professed Christianity and were bap tized." Schaffin Pop. Com. G. A.] authoritatively given butan indulgence to theirin continence ; ashe says, " for your incontinency." Would you know Paul s sentence in this matter? hear his words, I would that all menwere even aslmyself,"(i Cor. vii:;.) incontinence. And so here, the Apostlesmade this concession, not as vindicating the law, but as condescending to the infirmities of Judaism. Had theybeen vindica ting the law, theywould not have preached to the Jews in one way,and to the Gentiles in another. Had the observance been necessary for unbe lievers, then indeed it would plainly have like wise been necessary for all the faithful. But by their decision not to harass the Gentiles on this point, they showed that they permitted it by way of condescension to the Jews. Whereas the purpose of the false brethren was to cast them out of grace, and reduce them under the yoke of slavery again. This is the first differ ence, and a very wide one. The second is, that the Apostles so acted in Judsea, where the Law was in force, but the false brethren, every where, for all the Galatians were influenced by them. Whence it appears that their intention was, not to build up, but entirely to pull down the Gospel, and that the thing was permitted by the Apostles on one ground and zealously practiced by the false brethren on another. Ver. 4. "Who came in privily to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage." He points out their hostility by calling them spies ; for the sole object of a spy is to obtain for himself facilities of devastation and destruc tion, by becoming acquainted with his adver sary s position. And this is what those did, who wished to bring the disciples back to their old servitude. Hence too appears how very contrary their purpose was to that of the Apos tles ; the latter made concessions that they might gradually extricatethem from their servi tude, but the former plotted to subject them to one more severe. Therefore they looked round and observed accurately and made themselves busybodies to find out whowere uncircumcised ; as Paul says, "they came in privily to spy out our liberty," thus pointing out their machina tions not only by the term "spies," but by this expression of a furtive entrance and creeping in. Ver. 5. "To whom we gave place in the way of subjection, no, not for an hour." 4 Observe the forceandemphasis of the phrase ; he says not, " by argument," but, "by subjec tion, "for their object was not to teach good doc trine, but to subjugate and enslave them. 4 [" Had we consented to the suggestion to circumcise Titus, we should thereby have yielded to the false brethren standing in the background, who declared the circumcision of Gentile Christians to be necessary (Acts xv : 5.) ; but this did not at all take place." Meyer. G. A.]