Click to View

Early Church Fathers
Click to ViewMaster Index
Click to ViewPower Search

 Click to View

33 [And yet it was not long enough to have allowed his receiving his doctrine and Gospel from Peter. Besides he had already been preaching three years.-G. A.]

34 "Thus this James is distinguished from the circle of the twelve (1 Cor. xv. 8.) to which Peter belonged but included in the number of Apostles in the wider sense, which explains the merely supplementary mention of this Apostle."-Meyer.

35 [Compare John xix:25 with Matt. xxvii:56. But see Lightfoot's learned and exhaustive essay on "The Brethren of the Lord," Com. on Gal. pp. 88-127, and Schaff, Church History, I, 272-275.-G.A.]

36 [Compare Acts ix:30, where Luke says the brethren took Paul to Caesarea, and thence despatched him to Tarsus (in Cilicia.-G. A.]

37 ["The Acts mention five such journeys after his conversion: (1.)-ix:23 (Comp. Gal. i:18.) (2.)-xi:30; xii:25. (3.)-xv:2, the journey to the Apostolic Council, a.d. 50 or 51. (4.)-xviii:22, the Journey in 54. (5.)-xxi:15 (Comp. Ro. 15:25 ff.) the last journey when he was made a pardoner and sent to Caesarea in 58. The first of these journeys cannot be meant on account of Gal. i:18. The second is excluded by the chronological date of Gal. ii:1, for as it took place during the famine of Palestine in the year of Herod's death, a.d. 44, it would put the commission of Paul back to the year 30, which is much too early. There is no good reason why Paul should have mentioned this second journey. The fifth journey cannot be meant for it took place after the composition of Epistle to Galatians and after dispersion of Apostles. Nor can we think of the fourth journey which was transient, nor was Barnabas with him on that journey, Acts xv:39. So the journey here mentioned is the same as that of Acts xv:2. This took place 50 or 51, i. e., fourteen years after his conversion, 37."-Schaff in Pop. Com.-G. A.]

38 ["In St. Luke's narrative (Acts xv:2.) he is said to have been sent by the Church at Antioch. The revelation either prompted or confirmed the decision of the Church."-Lightfoot.-G. A.]

39 [That is, that Barnabas and Titus as witnesses of the proceedings might testify to the Judaizing teachers everywhere, &c.-G.A.]

40 [Being "a Greek:" Lightfoot says this is a "causal" participial clause giving the "reason" why Titus was not circumcised; because he was a Greek and not a Jew or part Jew as Timothy was. Schaff makes it a "concessive" clause; although he was a Greek, that is, a heathen. Farrar in Life and Work of Paul (233-6) claims that Titus was circumcised but not compelled to be. This however cannot be held in view of the context and the position of the words in the sentence.-G. A.]

41 ["These were formerly Pharisees (Acts xv:5.) and were still so in spirit although they professed Christianity and were baptized." Schaff in Pop. Com.-G. A.]

42 ["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.]

43 ["In order that by our conduct the principle of Christian freedom should not be shaken and ye should not be induced to deviate from the truth of the Gospel by mixing it up with Mosaism."-Meyer.-G. A.]

44 [Lightfoot says, "The expression is depreciatory here, not indeed of the twelve themselves but of the extravagant and exclusive claims set up for them by the Judaizers." So also Dr. Schaff. "The addition of ti ei[nai and o#poioi betrays a certain irritation in reference to the opponents who would not concede Paul an estimation given to the original Apostles."-Meyer.-G. A.]

45 ["It is entirely in opposition to the context that Chrysostom Theophylact and Jerome refer this to the earlier teaching of the Apostles, making Paul say that whether at an earlier date they had been Judaizers or not was to him a matter of indifference."- Meyer.-G. A.]

46 [They did virtually abolish circumcision by the decree of the council at Jerusalem as is shown in the account in (Acts xv.) And the failure of the effort to have Titus circumcised shows that the account in Gal. ii has nothing inconsistent with that decree. This as to Gentiles. The question did not concern Jews, who were already circumcised in infancy except in cases like that of Timothy where circumcision had been neglected. His case Paul himself decided without any consultation with others.-G. A.]

47 ["This passage cannot be worse misunderstood than it has been by Baur according to whom there was a special Gospel of the uncircumcision and a special gospel of the circumcision, one maintaining the necessity of circumcision, the other allowing it to drop."- Meyer.-G. A.]

48 ["If there had been a real conflict in doctrine, the Apostles would not have given Paul their hand, and Paul would have refused them his."-G.A.]

49 ["There was no difference of doctrine or gospel, but only a division of territory, and how little Paul considered his apostolic call to the `Gentiles 0' as excluding the conversion of the Jews from his operations may be seen from such passages as 1 Cor. ix:20; Ro. i:16; ix:1; xi:14."-Meyer.-G. A.]

50 [Hebrews x:34 [This is interesting as showing that Chrysostom attributed the Epistle to the Hebrews to St. Paul, though most modern critics do not agree with him in that view.-G. A.]

51 [a0ll' ou=k e@sti tau=ta, ou0k e@otin a@page.G. A.]

52 S. Jerome adopts the interpretation given in the text, viz. that S. Peter's dissimulation was no sin, but intended as an opportunity for S. Paul to declare the freedom of the Gentiles from the Jewish Law. On the other hand, S. Austin considers that he acted through wrong motives, and sinned in dissembling. In this opinion he is supported by Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Cyril, of Alexandria, S. Gregory and Ambrosiaster. (Hieron. in loc, et alibi. August. de Bapt. contr. Donatist. ii. 2. de Mendacio 8. Tertull. de Praescript. 23. in Marc. iv. 3. v. 3. Cyprian, Ep. ad Quint. 71 Cyril. Alex. in Julian. ix. fin. Gregor. in Ezech. ii. Hom. 6, 9. Ambrosiast. in loc.) S. Austin is influenced in his judgment of the transaction by an anxiety lest disingenuousness and duplicity should receive countenance from the apparent example of an Apostle; S. Chrysostom and S. Jerome by affectionate reverence for the memory of so great a benefactor and so exalted a saint. Vid. Justinian, in loco.

[In earlier life Chrysostom had himself practiced such a "scheme," as that which he here attributes to Paul. In order to induce his friend Basil to be consecrated as a bishop he made on him the (false) impression that he himself had already been consecrated.] Neander (Life of Chrysostom p. 22.) says: "In the first book of his work on the Priesthood Chrysostom defends the principle that a falsehood is permitted for a good object. An invention which has for its sole object the advantage of another is rather an oi/konomi/a (the word he uses in expounding our passage.) This lax view respecting truth was not peculiar to Chrysostom but was consonant with the prevailing spirit of the Eastern Church. There were a few exceptions however to this view, among whom were John of Lycopolis in Egypt, and Basil of Caesarea who says tou kuri/on diafora\n yeu/douj ou0demai/n ekfh/nantoj. Schaff says (Prolegomena p. 8): "Origen, Jerome and Chrysostom explain the offense of this collision away by turning it into a theatrical and hypocritical farce, shrewdly arranged by the Apostle for a purpose. In this respect the modern standard of ethics is far superior to that of the Fathers and more fully accords with the spirit of the New Testament." [We may add that Chrysostom's view gains nothing; for to save one Apostle from the charge of unpremeditated hypocrisy, he makes both guilty of premeditated hypocrisy.-G. A.]

53 [For the bearing of this passage upon the Tübingen theory of Baur, "the most important of recent theological controversies" see Lightfoot's Commentary on Galatians, Excursus on St. Paul and the Three, pp. 191 ff., and Fisher's Supernatural Origin of Christianity, pp. 205-ff.-G. A.]

54 [Schaff says: "The following verses to the end of the chapter are a summary report or dramatic sketch of Paul's address to Peter." So also Meyer who gives four good reasons for this view. So also Schmoller (in Lange) and Ellicott. Others think that vv. 15-21 are addressed to the Galatians.-G. A.]

55 ["Thus to be justified in Christ, it was necessary to sink to the level of Gentiles to become `sinners 0' in fact. But are we not thus making Christ a minster of sin? Away with the profane thought! No, the guilt is not in abandoning the Law, but in seeking it again when abandoned. Thus alone we convict ourselves of transgression. On the other hand in abandoning the Law we did but follow the promptings of the Law." Lightfoot.-G. A.]

56 [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.]

57 ["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 Caesarea by divine command and at first at Antioch) and thus condemn my own former conduct."-Schaff in Pop. Com.-G. A.]

58 ['egw9 ga\r-In my case the process has been this, using his own experience.-G. A ]

59 ["This second interpretation of Chrysostom is undoubtedly the correct one (though he errs in elucidating the relation of dia; by referring to Deut. 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.]

60 ["That I might live unto God" is not to be joined to "I have been crucified with Christ" as Chrysostom, for it belongs to the completeness of the thought introduced by gar ver. 19.-Meyer.-G. A.]

61 [This is the rendering of the Rev. Ver. though the American Committee has, "And it is no longer I that live;" and correctly so. For as Dr. Schaff says, The reading of the Rev. Ver. (and the Author. Ver. too) conveys a beautiful and true idea, but it is grammatically incorrect, since the original has no "nevertheless" and no "yet." Pop. Com. on Gal. and Companion to the Greek Testament, p. 453.-G. A.]

62 [Chrysostom held baptismal regeneration.-G. A.]

63 ["Chrysostom teaches that God foreordained all men to holiness and salvation and that Christ died for all and is both willing and able to save all, but not against their will."-Schaff in Proleg. p. 20.-G.A.]

Click Your Choice