{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42645/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42645","id":"gutenberg_42645","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42645","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Galatians -- Commentaries","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"Transcriber's note:\n\nThis e-text includes Greek characters and punctuation that will\nonly display in UTF-8 (Unicode) text readers, e.g. \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9 If\nany of these characters do not display properly, make sure your\ntext reader\u2019s \u201ccharacter set\u201d or \u201cfile encoding\u201d is set to Unicode\n(UTF-8). You may also need to change the default font. As a last\nresort, use the ISO-8859-1 (Latin-1) version of this text instead, in\nwhich the Greek words have been transliterated.\n\n\n\n\n THE\n\n EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.\n\n BY THE REV. PROFESSOR\n\n G. G. FINDLAY, B.A.,\n\n HEADINGLEY COLLEGE, LEEDS.\n\n NEW YORK:\n A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON,\n 51 EAST TENTH STREET, NEAR BROADWAY.\n 1893.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n _THE PROLOGUE._\n\n CHAPTER i. 1-10.\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\n PAGE\n\n THE ADDRESS 3\n\n CHAPTER II.\n\n THE SALUTATION 19\n\n CHAPTER III.\n\n THE ANATHEMA 34\n\n\n _THE PERSONAL HISTORY._\n\n CHAPTER i. 11-ii. 21.\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n\n PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST 53\n\n CHAPTER V.\n\n PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION 68\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n\n PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH 83\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n\n PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN 98\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n\n PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS 113\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n\n PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH 129\n\n CHAPTER X.\n\n THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE 146\n\n\n _THE DOCTRINAL POLEMIC._\n\n CHAPTER iii. 1-v. 12.\n\n CHAPTER XI.\n\n THE GALATIAN FOLLY 165\n\n CHAPTER XII.\n\n ABRAHAM'S BLESSING AND THE LAW'S CURSE 180\n\n CHAPTER XIII.\n\n THE COVENANT OF PROMISE 196\n\n CHAPTER XIV.\n\n THE DESIGN OF THE LAW 211\n\n CHAPTER XV.\n\n THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD 227\n\n CHAPTER XVI.\n\n THE HEIR'S COMING OF AGE 242\n\n CHAPTER XVII.\n\n THE RETURN TO BONDAGE 257\n\n CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n PAUL'S ENTREATY 272\n\n CHAPTER XIX.\n\n THE STORY OF HAGAR 286\n\n CHAPTER XX.\n\n SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 302\n\n CHAPTER XXI.\n\n THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS 316\n\n\n _THE ETHICAL APPLICATION._\n\n CHAPTER v. 13-vi. 10.\n\n CHAPTER XXII.\n\n THE PERILS OF LIBERTY 333\n\n CHAPTER XXIII.\n\n CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH 347\n\n CHAPTER XXIV.\n\n THE WORKS OF THE FLESH 361\n\n CHAPTER XXV.\n\n THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT 375\n\n CHAPTER XXVI.\n\n OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN 390\n\n CHAPTER XXVII.\n\n SOWING AND REAPING 405\n\n\n _THE EPILOGUE._\n\n CHAPTER vi. 11-18.\n\n CHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING 421\n\n CHAPTER XXIX.\n\n RITUAL NOTHING: CHARACTER EVERYTHING 435\n\n CHAPTER XXX.\n\n THE BRAND OF JESUS 448\n\n\n\n\n_THE PROLOGUE._\n\nCHAPTER i. 1-10.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n_THE ADDRESS._\n\n \"Paul, an apostle (not from men, neither through man, but\n through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from\n the dead), and all the brethren which are with me, unto the\n Churches of Galatia.\"[1]--GAL. i. 1, 2.\n\n [1] The text used in this exposition is, with very few\n exceptions, that of the Revised English Version, or its margin.\n\n\nAntiquity has nothing to show more notable in its kind, or more\nprecious, than this letter of Paul to the Churches of Galatia. It\ntakes us back, in some respects nearer than any other document we\npossess, to the beginnings of Christian theology and the Christian\nChurch. In it the spiritual consciousness of Christianity first\nreveals itself in its distinctive character and its full strength,\nfree from the trammels of the past, realizing the advent of the new\nkingdom of God that was founded in the death of Christ. It is the\nvoice of the Church testifying \"God hath sent forth the Spirit of His\nSon into our hearts.\" Buried for a thousand years under the weight\nof the Catholic legalism, the teaching of this Epistle came to life\nagain in the rise of Protestantism. Martin Luther put it to his lips\nas a trumpet to blow the reveill\u00e9 of the Reformation. His famous\nCommentary summoned enslaved Christendom to recover \"the liberty\nwherewith Christ hath made us free.\" Of all the great Reformer's\nwritings this was the widest in its influence and the dearest to\nhimself. For the spirit of Paul lived again in Luther, as in no other\nsince the Apostle's day. The Epistle to the Galatians is the charter\nof Evangelical faith.\n\nThe historical criticism of the present century has brought this\nwriting once more to the front of the conflict of faith. Born in\ncontroversy, it seems inevitably to be born for controversy. Its\ninterpretation forms the pivot of the most thoroughgoing recent\ndiscussions touching the beginnings of Christian history and the\nauthenticity of the New Testament record. The Galatian Epistle is,\nin fact, the key of New Testament Apologetics. Round it the Roman\nand Corinthian Letters group themselves, forming together a solid,\nimpregnable quaternion, and supplying a fixed starting-point and\nan indubitable test for the examination of the critical questions\nbelonging to the Apostolic age. Whatever else may be disputed, it\nis agreed that there was an apostle Paul, who wrote these four\nEpistles to certain Christian societies gathered out of heathenism,\ncommunities numerous, widely scattered, and containing men of\nadvanced intelligence; and this within thirty years of the death\nof Jesus Christ. Every critic must reckon with this fact. The most\nsceptical criticism makes a respectful pause before our Epistle.\nHopeless of destroying its testimony, Rationalism treats it with\nan even exaggerated deference; and seeks to extract evidence from\nit against its companion witnesses amongst the New Testament\nwritings. This attempt, however misdirected, is a signal tribute\nto the importance of the document, and to the force with which the\npersonality of the writer and the conditions of the time have\nstamped themselves upon it. The deductions of the Baurian criticism\nappear to us to rest on a narrow and arbitrary examination of\nisolated passages; they spring from a mistaken _\u00e0 priori_ view of the\nhistorical situation. Granting however to these inferences, which\nwill meet us as we proceed, their utmost weight, they still leave\nthe testimony of Paul to the supernatural character of Christianity\nsubstantially intact.\n\nOf the four major Epistles, this one is superlatively characteristic\nof its author. It is _Paulinissima Paulinarum_--most Pauline of\nPauline things. It is largely autobiographical; hence its peculiar\nvalue. Reading it, we watch history in the making. We trace the\nrise of the new religion in the typical man of the epoch. The\nmaster-builder of the Apostolic Church stands before us, at the\ncrisis of his work. He lets us look into his heart, and learn the\nsecret of his power. We come to know the Apostle Paul as we know\nscarcely any other of the world's great minds. We find in him a man\nof the highest intellectual and spiritual powers, equally great in\npassion and in action, as a thinker and a leader of men. But at every\nstep of our acquaintance the Apostle points us beyond himself; he\nsays, \"It is not I: it is Christ that lives in me.\" If this Epistle\nteaches us the greatness of Paul, it teaches us all the more the\nDivine greatness of Jesus Christ, before whom that kingly intellect\nand passionate heart bowed in absolute devotion.\n\nThe situation which the Epistle reveals and the personal references\nin which it abounds are full of interest at every point. They furnish\nquite essential data to the historian of the Early Church. We could\nwish that the Apostle, telling us so much, had told us more. His\nallusions, clear enough, we must suppose, to the first readers, have\nlent themselves subsequently to very conflicting interpretations.\nBut as they stand, they are invaluable. The fragmentary narrative\nof the Acts requires, especially in its earlier sections, all the\nillustration that can be obtained from other sources. The conversion\nof Paul, and the Council at Jerusalem, events of capital importance\nfor the history of Apostolic times, are thereby set in a light\ncertainly more complete and satisfactory than is furnished in Luke's\nnarrative, taken by itself. And Paul's references to the Judean\nChurch and its three \"pillars,\" touch the crucial question of New\nTestament criticism, namely that concerning the relation of the\nGentile Apostle to Jewish Christianity and the connection between\nhis theology and the teaching of Jesus. Our judgement respecting\nthe conflict between Peter and Paul at Antioch in particular will\ndetermine our whole conception of the legalist controversy, and\nconsequently of the course of Church history during the first two\ncenturies. Around these cursory allusions has gathered a contest only\nless momentous than that from which they sprung.\n\nThe personal and the doctrinal element are equally prominent in\nthis Epistle; and appear in a combination characteristic of the\nwriter. Paul's theology is the theology of experience. \"It pleased\nGod,\" he says, \"to reveal His Son in me\" (ch. i. 16). His teaching\nis cast in a psychological mould. It is largely a record of the\nApostle's spiritual history; it is the expression of a living,\ninward process--a personal appropriation of Christ, and a growing\nrealization of the fulness of the Godhead in Him. The doctrine of\nPaul was as far as possible removed from being the result of abstract\ndeduction, or any mere combination of data externally given. In his\nindividual consciousness, illuminated by the vision of Christ and\npenetrated by the Spirit of God, he found his message for the world.\n\"We believe, and therefore speak. We have received the Spirit of\nGod, that we may know the things freely given us of God:\" sentences\nlike these show us very clearly how the Apostle's doctrine formed\nitself in his mind. His apprehension of Christ, above all of the\ncross, was the focus, the creative and governing centre, of all his\nthoughts concerning God and man, time and eternity. In the light of\nthis knowledge he read the Old Testament, he interpreted the earthly\nlife and teaching of Jesus. On the ground of this personal sense\nof salvation he confronted Peter at Antioch; on the same ground he\nappeals to the vacillating Galatians, sharers with himself in the\nnew life of the Spirit. Here lies the nerve of his argument in this\nEpistle. The theory of the relation of the Law to the Abrahamic\npromise developed in the third chapter, is the historical counterpart\nof the relation of the legal to the evangelical consciousness, as he\nhad experienced the two states in turn within his own breast. The\nspirit of Paul was a microcosm, in which the course of the world's\nreligious evolution was summed up, and brought to the knowledge of\nitself.\n\nThe Apostle's influence over the minds of others was due in great\npart to the extraordinary force with which he apprehended the facts\nof his own spiritual nature. Through the depth and intensity of his\npersonal experience he touched the experience of his fellows, he\nseized on those universal truths that are latent in the consciousness\nof mankind, \"by manifestation of the truth commending himself to\nevery man's conscience in the sight of God.\" But this knowledge\nof the things of God was not the mere fruit of reflection and\nself-searching; it was \"the ministration of the Spirit.\" Paul did not\nsimply _know_ Christ; he was one with Christ, \"joined to the Lord,\none spirit\" with Him. He did not therefore speak out of the findings\nof his own spirit; the absolute Spirit, the Spirit of truth and of\nChrist, spoke in him. Truth, as he knew it, was the self-assertion of\na Divine life. And so this handful of old letters, broken and casual\nin form, with their \"rudeness of speech,\" their many obscurities,\ntheir rabbinical logic, have stirred the thoughts of men and swayed\ntheir lives with a power greater perhaps than belongs to any human\nutterances, saving only those of the Divine Master.\n\nThe features of Paul's style show themselves here in their most\npronounced form. \"The style is the man.\" And the whole man is in this\nletter. Other Epistles bring into relief this or that quality of the\nApostle's disposition and of his manner as a writer; here all are\npresent. The subtlety and trenchant vigour of Pauline dialectic are\nnowhere more conspicuous than in the discussion with Peter in ch. ii.\nThe discourse on Promise and Law in ch. iii. is a master-piece of\nexposition, unsurpassed in its keenness of insight, breadth of view,\nand skill of application. Such passages as ch. i. 15, 16; ii. 19, 20;\nvi. 14, take us into the heart of the Apostle's teaching, and reveal\nits mystical depth of intuition. Behind the masterful dialectician we\nfind the spiritual seer, the man of contemplation, whose fellowship\nis with the eternal and unseen. And the emotional temperament of\nthe writer has left its impress on this Epistle not less distinctly\nthan his mental and spiritual gifts. The denunciations of ch. i.\n6-10; ii. 4, 5; iv. 9; v. 7-12; vi. 12-14, burn with a concentrated\nintensity of passion, a sublime and holy scorn against the enemies of\nthe cross, such as a nature like Paul's alone is capable of feeling.\nNor has the Apostle penned anything on the other hand more amiable\nand touching, more winningly frank and tender in appeal, than the\nentreaty of ch. iv. 11-20. His last sentence, in ch. vi. 17, is an\nirresistible stroke of pathos. The ardour of his soul, his vivacity\nof mind and quick sensibility, are apparent throughout. Those sudden\nturns of thought and bursts of emotion that occur in all his Epistles\nand so much perplex their interpreters, are especially numerous in\nthis. And yet we find that these interruptions are never allowed to\ndivert the writer from his purpose, nor to destroy the sequence of\nhis thought. They rather carry it forward with greater vehemence\nalong the chosen course, as storms will a strong and well-manned\nship. The Epistle is strictly a unity. It is written, as one might\nsay, at a single breath, as if under pressure and in stress of mind.\nThere is little of the amplitude of expression and the delight in\nlingering over some favourite idea that characterize the later\nEpistles. Nor is there any passage of sustained eloquence to compare\nwith those that are found in the Roman and Corinthian letters. The\nbusiness on which the Apostle writes is too urgent, his anxiety too\ngreat, to allow of freedom and discursiveness of thought. Hence this\nEpistle is to an unusual degree closely packed in matter, rapid in\nmovement, and severe in tone.\n\nIn its construction the Epistle exhibits an almost dramatic\ncharacter. It is full of action and animation. There is a gradual\nunfolding of the subject, and a skilful combination of scene and\nincident brought to bear on the solution of the crucial question.\nThe Apostle himself, the insidious Judaizers, and the wavering\nGalatians,--these are the protagonists of the action; with Peter\nand the Church at Jerusalem playing a secondary part, and Abraham\nand Moses, Isaac and Ishmael, appearing in the distance. The first\nAct conducts us rapidly from scene to scene till we behold Paul\nlabouring amongst the Gentiles, and the Churches of Judea listening\nwith approval to the reports of his success. The Council of Jerusalem\nopens a new stage in the history. Now Gentile liberties are at stake;\nbut Titus' circumcision is successfully resisted, and Paul as the\nApostle of the Uncircumcised is acknowledged by \"the pillars\" as\ntheir equal; and finally Peter, when he betrays the truth of the\nGospel at Antioch, is corrected by the Gentile Apostle. The third\nchapter carries us away from the present conflict into the region\nof first principles,--to the Abrahamic Covenant with its spiritual\nblessing and world-wide promise, opposed by the condemning Mosaic\nLaw, an opposition finally resolved by the coming of Christ and the\ngift of His Spirit of adoption. At this point the Apostle turns the\ngathered force of his argument upon his readers, and grapples with\nthem front to front in the expostulation carried on from ch. iv. 8\nto v. 12, in which the story of Hagar forms a telling episode. The\nfifth and closing Act, extending to the middle of ch. vi., turns on\nthe antithesis of Flesh and Spirit, bringing home the contention to\nthe region of ethics, and exhibiting to the Galatians the practical\neffect of their following the Pauline or the Judaistic leadership.\nPaul and the Primitive Church; Judaism and Gentile-Christian\nliberties; the Covenants of Promise and of Law; the circumcision or\nnon-circumcision of the Galatians; the dominion of Flesh or Spirit:\nthese are the contrasts through which the Epistle advances. Its\ncentre lies in the decisive question given in the _fourth_ of these\nantitheses. If we were to fix it in a single point, ver. 2 of ch. v.\nis the sentence we should choose:--\n\n \"Behold, I Paul say unto you,\n If ye be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.\"\n\nThe above analysis may be reduced to the common threefold division,\nfollowed in this exposition:--viz. (1) _Personal History_, ch. i.\n11-ii. 21; (2) _Doctrinal Polemic_, ch. iii. 1-v. 12; (3) _Ethical\nApplication_, ch. v. 13-vi. 10.\n\nThe epistolary Introduction forms the _Prologue_, ch. i. 1-10; and an\n_Epilogue_ is appended, by way of renewed warning and protestation,\nfollowed by the concluding signature and benediction,--ch. vi. 11-18.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe Address occupies the first two verses of the Epistle.\n\nI. On the one side is _the writer_: \"Paul, an Apostle.\" In his\nearliest Letters (to Thessalonica) the title is wanting; so also\nin Philippians and Philemon. The last instance explains the other\ntwo. To the Macedonian Churches Paul writes more in the style of\nfriendship than authority: \"for love's sake he rather entreats.\" With\nthe Galatians it is different. He proceeds to define his apostleship\nin terms that should leave no possible doubt respecting its character\nand rights: \"not from men,\" he adds, \"nor through man; but through\nJesus Christ, and God the Father, that raised Him from the dead.\"\n\nThis reads like a contradiction of some statement made by Paul's\nopposers. Had they insinuated that he _was_ \"an apostle from men,\"\nthat his office was derived, like their own, only from the mother\nChurch in Jerusalem? Such insinuations would very well serve their\npurpose; and if they were made, Paul would be sure not to lose a\nmoment in meeting them.\n\nThe word _apostle_ had a certain latitude of meaning.[2] It was\nalready, there is reason to believe, a term of Jewish official\nusage when our Lord applied it to His chosen Twelve. It signified\na _delegate_ or _envoy_, accredited by some public authority, and\ncharged with a special message. We can understand therefore its\napplication to the emissaries of particular Churches--of Jerusalem\nor Antioch, for example--despatched as their messengers to other\nChurches, or with a general commission to proclaim the Gospel. The\nrecently discovered \"Teaching of the Apostles\" shows that this use\nof the title continued in Jewish-Christian circles to the end of the\nfirst century, alongside of the restricted and higher use. The lower\napostleship belonged to Paul in common with Barnabas and Silas and\nmany others.\n\n [2] Compare Acts xiv. 4, 14 (_Barnabas and Paul_); 1 Thess. ii. 6\n (_Paul and his comrades_); Rom. xvi. 7 (_Andronicus and Junias_);\n 2 Cor. viii. 23 (_Titus and others_, \"apostles of the churches\");\n 2 Cor. xi. 13 (\"false apostles\": _Judean emissaries_); also Rev.\n ii. 2; Heb. iii. 1; John xiii. 16. On the N.T. use of _apostle_,\n see Lightfoot's Galatians, pp. 92-101; but especially Huxtable's\n _Dissertation_ in the Pulpit Commentary (Galatians), pp.\n xxiii.-l., the most satisfactory elucidation of the subject we\n have met with. Prebendary Huxtable however presses his argument\n too far, when he insists that St. Paul held his higher commission\n entirely in abeyance until the crisis of the Judaic controversy.\n\nIn the earlier period of his ministry, the Apostle was seemingly\ncontent to rank in public estimation with his companions in the\nGentile mission. But a time came when he was compelled to arrogate to\nhimself the higher dignity. His right thereto was acknowledged at\nthe memorable conference in Jerusalem by the leaders of the Jewish\nChurch. So we gather from the language of ch. ii. 7-9. But the full\nexercise of his authority was reserved for the present emergency,\nwhen all his energy and influence were required to stem the tide of\nthe Judaistic reaction. We can well imagine that Paul \"gentle in the\nmidst\" of his flock and \"not seeking to be of weight\" (1 Thess. ii.\n6, 7), had hitherto said as little as need be on the subject of his\nofficial rights. His modesty had exposed him to misrepresentations\nboth in Corinth and in Galatia. He will \"have\" these people \"to\nknow\" that his gospel is in the strictest sense Divine, and that he\nreceived his commission, as certainly as any of the Twelve, from the\nlips of Jesus Christ Himself (ver. 11).\n\n\"Not from men\" excludes human derivation; \"not through man,\" human\nintervention in the conferment of Paul's office. The singular number\n(_man_) replaces the plural in the latter phrase, because it stands\nimmediately opposed to \"Jesus Christ\" (a striking witness this to His\nDivinity). The second clause carries the negation farther than the\nfirst; for a call from God may be, and commonly is, imposed by human\nhands. There are, says Jerome, four kinds of Christian ministers:\nfirst, those sent neither from men nor through man, like the prophets\nof old time and the Apostles; secondly, those who are from God, but\nthrough man, as it is with their legitimate successors; thirdly,\nthose who are from men, but not from God, as when one is ordained\nthrough mere human favour and flattery; the fourth class consists of\nsuch as have their call neither from God nor man, but wholly from\nthemselves, as with false prophets and the false apostles of whom\nPaul speaks. His vocation, the Apostle declares, was superhuman,\nalike in its origin and in the channel by which it was conveyed. It\nwas no voice of man that summoned Saul of Tarsus from the ranks of\nthe enemies to those of the servants of Christ, and gave him the\nmessage he proclaimed. Damascus and Jerusalem in turn acknowledged\nthe grace given unto him; Antioch had sent him forth on her behalf\nto the regions beyond: but he was conscious of a call anterior to\nall this, and that admitted of no earthly validation. \"Am I not an\napostle?\" he exclaims, \"have I not seen Jesus our Lord?\" (1 Cor. ix.\n1). \"Truly the signs of the Apostle were wrought in him,\" both in\nthe miraculous powers attending his office, and in those moral and\nspiritual qualities of a minister of God in which he was inferior to\nnone.[3] For the exercise of his ministry he was responsible neither\nto \"those of repute\" at Jerusalem, nor to his censurers at Corinth;\nbut to Christ who had bestowed it (1 Cor. iv. 3, 4).\n\n [3] 1 Cor. xv. 10; 2 Cor. iv. 2; vi. 3-10; xi. 5, 16-xii. 13.\n\nThe call of the Apostle proceeded also from \"God the Father, who\nraised Jesus Christ from the dead.\" Christ was in this act the\nmediator, declaring the Supreme will. In other places, more briefly,\nhe styles himself \"Apostle by the will of God.\" His appointment\ntook place by a Divine intervention, in which the ordinary sequence\nof events was broken through. Long after the Saviour in His bodily\npresence had ascended to heaven, when in the order of nature it was\nimpossible that another Apostle should be elected, and when the\nadministration of His Church had been for several years carried on\nby human hands, He appeared once more on earth for the purpose of\nmaking this man His \"minister and witness;\" He appeared in the name\nof \"the Father, who had raised Him from the dead.\" This interposition\ngave to Paul's ministry an exceptional character. While the mode of\nhis election was in one aspect humbling, and put him in the position\nof \"the untimely one,\" the \"least of the Apostles,\" whose appearance\nin that capacity was unlooked for and necessarily open to suspicion;\non the other hand, it was glorious and exalting, since it so richly\ndisplayed the Divine mercy and the transforming power of grace.\n\nBut why does he say, _who raised Him from the dead_? Because it was\nthe _risen Jesus_ that he saw, and that he was conscious of seeing\nin the moment of the vision. The revelation that arrested him before\nDamascus, in the same moment convinced him that Jesus was risen, and\nthat he himself was called to be His servant. These two convictions\nwere inseparably linked in Paul's recollections. As surely as God\nthe Father had raised His Son Jesus from the dead and given Him\nglory, so surely had the glorified Jesus revealed Himself to Saul\nhis persecutor to make him His Apostle. He was, not less truly than\nPeter or John, a witness of His resurrection. The message of the\nResurrection was the burden of the Apostleship.\n\nHe adds, \"and all the brethren which are with me.\" For it was Paul's\ncustom to associate with himself in these official letters his\nfellow-labourers, present at the time. From this expression we gather\nthat he was attended just now by a considerable band of companions,\nsuch as we find enumerated in Acts xx. 2-6, attending him on his\njourney from Ephesus to Corinth during the third missionary tour.\nThis circumstance has some bearing on the date of the letter. Bishop\nLightfoot (in his Commentary) shows reason for believing that it was\nwritten, not from Ephesus as commonly supposed, but at a somewhat\nlater time, from _Macedonia_. It is connected by numerous and close\nlinks of internal association with the Epistle to the Romans, which\non this supposition speedily followed, and with 2 Corinthians,\nimmediately preceding it. And the allusion of the text, though of\nno decisive weight taken by itself, goes to support this reasoning.\nUpon this hypothesis, our Epistle was composed in Macedonia,\nduring the autumn of 57 (or possibly, 58) A.D. The emotion which\nsurcharges 2 Corinthians runs over into Galatians: while the theology\nwhich labours for expression in Galatians finds ampler and calmer\ndevelopment in Romans.\n\nII. Of _the readers_, \"the churches of Galatia,\" it is not necessary\nto say much at present. The character of the Galatians, and the\ncondition of their Churches, will speak for themselves as we proceed.\n_Galatian_ is equivalent to _Gaul_, or _Kelt_. This people was a\ndetached fragment of the great Western-European race, which forms the\nbasis of our own Irish and West-British populations, as well as of\nthe French nationality. They had conquered for themselves a home in\nthe north of Asia Minor during the Gaulish invasion that poured over\nSouth-eastern Europe and into the Asiatic peninsula some three and\na half centuries before. Here the Gallic intruders stubbornly held\ntheir ground; and only succumbed to the irresistible power of Rome.\nDefeated by the Consul Manlius in 189 B.C., the Galatians retained\ntheir autonomy, under the rule of native princes, until in the year\n25 B.C., on the death of Amyntas, the country was made a province of\nthe Empire. The people maintained their distinctive character and\nspeech despite these changes. At the same time they readily acquired\nGreek culture, and were by no means barbarians; indeed they were\nnoted for their intelligence. In religion they seem to have largely\nimbibed the Phrygian idolatry of the earlier inhabitants.\n\nThe Roman Government had annexed to Galatia certain districts\nlying to the south, in which were situated most of the cities\nvisited by Paul and Barnabas in their first missionary tour. This\nhas led some scholars to surmise that Paul's \"Galatians\" were\nreally Pisidians and Lycaonians, the people of Derbe, Lystra, and\nPisidian Antioch. But this is improbable. The inhabitants of these\nregions were never called Galatians in common speech; and Luke\ndistinguishes \"the Galatic country\" quite clearly from its southern\nborderlands. Besides, the Epistle contains no allusions, such as we\nshould expect in the case supposed, to the Apostle's earlier and\nmemorable associations with these cities of the South. Elsewhere he\nmentions them by name (2 Tim. iii. 11); and why not here, if he were\naddressing this circle of Churches?\n\nThe Acts of the Apostles relates nothing of Paul's sojourn in\nGalatia, beyond the fact that he twice \"passed through the Galatic\ncountry\" (Acts xvi. 6; xviii. 23), on the first occasion during the\nsecond missionary journey, in travelling north and then westwards\nfrom Pisidia; the second time, on his way from Antioch to Ephesus, in\nthe course of the third tour. Galatia lay outside the main line of\nPaul's evangelistic career, as the historian of the Acts describes\nit, outside the Apostle's own design, as it would appear from ch. iv.\n13. In the first instance Galatia follows (in the order of the Acts),\nin the second precedes Phrygia, a change which seems to indicate\nsome new importance accruing to this region: the further clause in\nActs xviii. 23, \"strengthening all the disciples,\" shows that the\nwriter was aware that by this time a number of Christian societies\nwere in existence in this neighbourhood.\n\nNo _city_ is mentioned in the address, but the _country_ of Galatia\nonly--the single example of the kind in Paul's Epistles. The\nGalatians were countryfolk rather than townsfolk. And the Church\nseems to have spread over the district at large, without gathering\nitself into any one centre, such as the Apostle had occupied in other\nparts of his Gentile field.\n\nStill more significant is the curtness of this designation. Paul does\nnot say, \"To the Churches _of God_ in Galatia,\" or \"to the saints\nand faithful brethren in Christ,\" as in other Epistles. He is in no\nmood for compliments. These Galatians are, he fears, \"removing from\nGod who had called them\" (ver. 6). He stands in doubt of them. It is\na question whether they are now, or will long continue, \"Churches\nof God\" at all. He would gladly commend them if he could; but he\nmust instead begin with reproaches. And yet we shall find that, as\nthe Apostle proceeds, his sternness gradually relaxes. He remembers\nthat these \"foolish Galatians\" are his \"children,\" once ardently\nattached to him (ch. iv. 12-20). His heart yearns towards them; he\ntravails over them in birth again. Surely they will not forsake\nhim, and renounce the gospel of whose blessings they had enjoyed so\nrich an experience (ch. iii. 3; v. 10). He calls them \"brethren\"\nonce and again; and with this kindly word, holding out the hand of\nforgiveness, he concludes the letter.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n_THE SALUTATION._\n\n \"Grace to you and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus\n Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us\n out of this present evil world, according to the will of our God\n and Father: to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.\"--GAL.\n i. 3-5.\n\n\nThe greetings and benedictions of the Apostolic Letters deserve\nmore attention from us than they sometimes receive. We are apt to\npass over them as if they were a kind of pious formality, like the\nconventional phrases of our own epistles. But to treat them in such\nfashion is to do injustice to the seriousness and sincerity of Holy\nScripture. This salutation of \"Grace and Peace\" comes from Paul's\nvery heart. It breathes the essence of his gospel.\n\nThis formula appears to be of the Apostle's coining. Other writers,\nwe may believe, borrowed it from him. _Grace_ represents the common\nGreek salutation,--_joy to you_, \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd changing to the kindred\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2; while the more religious _peace_ of the Hebrew, so often heard\nfrom the lips of Jesus, remains unaltered, only receiving from the\nNew Covenant a tenderer significance. It is as though East and West,\nthe old world and the new, met here and joined their voices to bless\nthe Church and people of Jesus Christ.\n\n_Grace_ is the sum of all blessing bestowed by God; _peace_, in its\nwide Hebraic range of meaning, the sum of all blessing experienced\nby man. _Grace_ is the Father's goodwill and bounty in Christ to\nHis undeserving children; _peace_, the rest and reconcilement, the\nrecovered health and gladness of the child brought home to the\nFather's house, dwelling in the light of his Father's face. _Grace_\nis the fountain of redeeming love; _peace_ is the \"river of life\nproceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb,\" that flows calm\nand deep through each believing soul, the river whose \"streams make\nglad the city of God.\"\n\nWhat could a pastor wish better for his people, or friend for the\nfriend he loves most, than this double blessing? Paul's letters are\nperfumed with its fragrance. Open them where you will, they are\nbreathing out, \"Grace to you and peace.\" Paul has hard things to\nwrite in this Epistle, sorrowful complaints to make, grievous errors\nto correct; but still with \"Grace and peace\" he begins, and with\n\"Peace and grace\" he will end! And so this stern and reproachful\nletter to these \"foolish Galatians\" is all embalmed and folded up in\ngrace and peace. That is the way to \"be angry and sin not.\" So mercy\nrejoices over judgement.\n\nThese two benedictions, we must remember, go together. Peace comes\nthrough grace. The proud heart never knows peace; it will not yield\nto God the glory of His grace. It scorns to be a debtor, even to Him.\nThe proud man stands upon his rights, upon his merits. And he will\nhave them; for God is just. But peace is not amongst them. No sinful\nchild of man deserves that. Is there wrong between your soul and God,\niniquity hidden in the heart? Till that wrong is confessed, till\nyou submit to the Almighty and your spirit bows at the Redeemer's\ncross, what hast thou to do with peace? No peace in this world, or\nin any world, for him who will not be at peace with God. \"When I kept\nsilence,\" so the ancient confession runs (Ps. xxxii. 3-5), \"my bones\nwaxed old through my moaning all the day long\"--that is why many a\nman is old before his time! because of this continual inward chafing,\nthis secret, miserable war of the heart against God. \"Day and night\nThy hand was heavy upon me; my moisture was turned into the drought\nof summer\"--the soul withered like grass, all the freshness and pure\ndelight of life wasted and perishing under the steady, unrelenting\nheat of the Divine displeasure. \"Then I said\"--I could bear it no\nlonger--\"I said, I will confess my transgression unto the Lord; and\nThou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.\" And then peace came to the\nweary soul. The bitterness and hardness of life were gone; the heart\nwas young again. The man was new born, a child of God.\n\nBut while Paul gives this salutation to all his Churches, his\ngreeting is extended and qualified here in a peculiar manner. The\nGalatians were falling away from faith in Christ to Jewish ritualism.\nHe does not therefore wish them \"Grace and peace\" in a general way,\nor as objects to be sought from any quarter or by any means that\nthey might choose; but only \"from God our Father, and our Lord Jesus\nChrist, who gave Himself for our sins.\" Here is already a note of\nwarning and a tacit contradiction of much that they were tempted to\nbelieve. It would have been a mockery for the Apostle to desire for\nthese fickle Galatians grace and peace on other terms. As at Corinth,\nso in Galatia, he is \"determined to know nothing save Jesus Christ\nand Him crucified.\" Above the puerilities of their Jewish ritual,\nabove the pettiness of their wrangling factions, he directs his\nreaders' gaze once more to the sacrifice of Calvary and the sublime\npurpose of God which it reveals.\n\nDo _we_ not need to be recalled to the same sight? We live in a\ndistracted and distracting age. Even without positive unbelief, the\ncross is too frequently thrust out of view by the hurry and press of\nmodern life. Nay, in the Church itself is it not in danger of being\npractically set on one side, amidst the throng of competing interests\nwhich solicit, and many of them justly solicit, our attention? We\nvisit Calvary too seldom. We do not haunt in our thoughts the sacred\nspot, and linger on this theme, as the old saints did. We fail to\nattain \"the fellowship of Christ's sufferings;\" and while the cross\nis outwardly exalted, its inward meaning is perhaps but faintly\nrealised. \"Tell us something new,\" they say; \"that story of the\ncross, that evangelical doctrine of yours we have heard it so often,\nwe know it all so well!\" If men are saying this, if the cross of\nChrist is made of none effect, its message staled by repetition, we\nmust be strangely at fault either in the hearing or the telling. Ah,\nif we knew the cross of Christ, it would crucify us; it would possess\nour being. Its supremacy can never be taken from it. That cross is\nstill the centre of the world's hope, the pillar of salvation. Let\nthe Church lose her hold of it, and she loses everything. She has no\nlonger any reason to exist.\n\nI. So the Apostle's greeting invites his readers to contemplate anew\n_the Divine gift bestowed upon sinful men_. It invokes blessing upon\nthem \"from our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins.\"\n\nTo see this gift in its greatness, let us go a little farther back;\nlet us consider who the Christ is that thus \"gives Himself.\" He is,\nwe are taught, the almoner of all the Divine bounties. He is not\nthe object alone, but the depositary and dispenser of the Father's\ngood pleasure to all worlds and all creatures. Creation is rooted\nin \"the Son of God's love\" (Col. i. 15-18). Universal life has its\nfountain in \"the Only-begotten, which is in the bosom of the Father.\"\nThe light that dispelled the weltering gloom of chaos, the more\nwondrous light that shone in the dawn of human reason, came from this\n\"outbeaming of the Father's glory.\" Countless gifts had He, \"the\nlife of men, the Word that was from the beginning,\" bestowed on a\nworld that knew Him not. Upon the chosen race, the people whom on the\nworld's behalf he formed for Himself, He showered His blessings. He\nhad given them promise and law, prophet and priest and king, gifts of\nfaith and hope, holy obedience and brave patience and deep wisdom and\nprophetic fire and heavenly rapture; and His gifts to them have come\nthrough them to us, \"partakers with them of the root and fatness of\nthe olive tree.\"\n\nBut now, to crown all, _He gave Himself_! \"The Word became flesh.\"\nThe Son of God planted Himself into the stock of human life, made\nHimself over to mankind; He became the Son of man. So in the fulness\nof time came the fulness of blessing. Earlier bestowments were\ninstalments and prophecies of this; later gifts are its outcome and\nits application. What could He have done more than this? What could\nthe Infinite God do more, even for the most worthy, than He has done\nfor us in \"sending His Son, the Only-begotten, that we might live\nthrough Him!\" Giving us Him, surely He will give us grace and peace.\n\nAnd if our Lord Jesus Christ \"gave Himself,\" is not that sufficient?\nWhat could Jewish ritual and circumcision add to this \"fulness of the\nGodhead?\" Why hunt after the shadows, when one has the substance?\nSuch were the questions which the Apostle has to ask his Judaizing\nreaders. And what, pray, do _we_ want with modern Ritualism, and\nits scenic apparatus, and its priestly offices? Are these things\ndesigned to eke out the insufficiency of Christ? Will they recommend\nHim better than His own gospel and the pure influence of His Spirit\navail to do in these latter days? Or has modern thought, to be sure,\nand the progress of the 19th century carried us beyond Jesus Christ,\nand created spiritual wants for which He has no supply? Paul at least\nhad no anticipation of this failure. All the need of hungry human\nhearts and searching minds and sorrowing spirits, to the world's\nlatest ages, the God of Paul, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is\nable to supply in Him. \"We are complete in Him,\"--if we but knew our\ncompleteness. The most advanced thinkers of the age will still find\nJesus Christ in advance of them. Those who draw the most largely from\nHis fulness, leave its depths unsounded. There are resources stored\nfor the times to come in the revelation of Christ, which our age is\ntoo slight, too hasty of thought, to comprehend. We are straitened in\nourselves; never in Him.\n\nFrom this supreme gift we can argue down to the humblest necessities,\nthe commonest trials of our daily lot. It adapts itself to the small\nanxieties of a struggling household, equally with the largest demands\nof our exacting age. \"Thou hast given us Thy Son,\" says some one,\n\"and wilt Thou not give us bread?\" We have a generous Lord. His\nonly complaint is that we do not ask enough. \"Ye are My friends,\"\nHe says: \"I have given My life for you. Ask what ye will, and it\nshall be done unto you.\" Giving us Himself, He has given us all\nthings. Abraham and Moses, David and Isaiah, \"Paul and Apollos and\nCephas--yea the world itself, life and death, things present and to\ncome--all are ours; and we are Christ's and Christ is God's\" (1 Cor.\niii. 22, 23). Such is the chain of blessing that hangs on this single\ngift.\n\nGreat as the gift is, it is not greater than our need. Wanting a\nDivine Son of man, human life remains a baffled aspiration, a pathway\nleading to no goal. Lacking Him, the race is incomplete, a body\nwithout its head, a flock that has no master. By the coming of Christ\nin the flesh human life finds its ideal realized; its haunting dream\nof a Divine helper and leader in the midst of men, of a spiritual\nand immortal perfection brought within its reach, has attained\nfulfilment. \"God hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the\nhouse of His servant David; as He spake by the mouth of His holy\nprophets, which have been since the world began.\" Jacob's vision has\ncome true. There is the golden ladder, with its foot resting on the\ncold, stony earth, and its top on heaven's starry platform, with its\nangels ascending and descending through the darkness; and you may\nclimb its steps, high as you will! So humanity receives its crown of\nlife. Heaven and earth are linked, God and man reunited in the person\nof Jesus Christ.\n\nBut Paul will not suffer us to linger at Bethlehem. He hastens on\nto Calvary. The Atonement, not the Incarnation, is in his view the\ncentre of Christianity. To the cross of Jesus, rather than to His\ncradle, he attaches our salvation. \"Jesus Christ gave Himself\"--what\nfor, and in what way? What was the errand that brought Him here,\nin such a guise, and at such a time? Was it to meet our _need_, to\nfulfil our human aspirations, to crown the moral edifice, to lead\nthe race onward to the goal of its development? Yes--ultimately, and\nin the final issue, for \"as many as receive Him\"; it was to \"present\nevery man perfect in Christ.\" But that was not the primary object of\nHis coming, of such a coming. Happy for us indeed, and for Him, if it\ncould have been so. To come to a world waiting for Him, hearkening\nfor the cry, \"Behold thy God, O Israel,\" would have been a pleasant\nand a fitting thing. But to find Himself rejected by His own, to be\nspit upon, to hear the multitude shout, \"Away with Him!\" was this\nthe welcome that He looked for? Yea surely, nothing else but this.\nFor He gave Himself _for our sins_. He came to a world steeped in\nwickedness, seething with rebellion against God, hating Him because\nit hated the Father that sent Him, sure to say as soon as it saw Him,\n\"We will not have this man to reign over us.\" Not therefore by way\nof incarnation and revelation alone, as it might have been for an\ninnocent race; but by way of _sacrifice_, as a victim on the altar of\nexpiation, \"a lamb led to the slaughter,\" He gave Himself up for us\nall. \"To deliver us from an evil world,\" says the Apostle; to mend\na faulty and imperfect world, something less and other would have\nsufficed.\n\nExtreme diseases call for extreme remedies. The case with which\nour good Physician had to deal was a desperate one. The world was\nsick at heart; its moral nature rotting to the core. Human life was\nshattered to its foundation. If it was to be saved, if the race was\nto escape perdition, the fabric must be reconstructed upon another\nbasis, on the ground of a new righteousness, outside ourselves and\nyet akin to us, near enough to take hold of us and grow into us,\nwhich should draw to itself the broken elements of human life, and\nas a vital organic force refashion them, \"creating\" men \"anew in\nChrist Jesus\"--a righteousness availing before God, and in its depth\nand width sufficient to bear a world's weight. Such a new foundation\nJesus Christ has laid in His death. \"He laid down His life for us,\"\nthe Shepherd for the sheep, the Friend for His perishing friends,\nthe Physician for sufferers who had no other remedy. It had come to\nthis,--either He must die, or we must die for ever. Such was the\nsentence of the All-wise Judge; on that judgement the Redeemer acted.\n\"His judgements are a great deep\"; and in this sentence there are\ndepths of mystery into which we tremble to look, \"secret things that\nbelong unto the Lord our God.\" But so it was. There was no way but\nthis, no moral possibility of saving the world, and yet saving Him\nthe accursed death.\n\nIf there had been, would not the Almighty Father have found it out?\nwould He not have \"taken away the cup\" from those white, quivering\nlips? No; He must _die_. He must consent to be \"made sin, made a\ncurse\" for us. He must humble His stainless innocence, humble His\nglorious Godhead down to the dust of death. He must die, at the hands\nof the men He created and loved, with the horror of the world's sin\nfastened on Him; die under a blackened heaven, under the averting of\nthe Father's face. And He did it. He said, \"Father, Thy will be done.\nSmite the Shepherd; but let the sheep escape.\" So He \"gave Himself\nfor our sins.\"\n\nAh, it was no easy march, no holiday pageant, the coming of the Son\nof God into this world of ours. He \"came to _save sinners_.\" Not to\nhelp good men--this were a grateful task; but to redeem bad men--the\nhardest work in God's universe. It tasked the strength and the\ndevotion of the Son of God. Witness Gethsemane. And it will cost His\nChurch something, more haply than we dream of now, if the work of\nthe Redeemer is to be made effectual, and \"the travail of His soul\nsatisfied.\"\n\nIn pity and in sorrow was that gift bestowed; in deep humility and\nsorrow must it be accepted. It is a very humbling thing to \"receive\nthe atonement,\" to be made righteous on such terms as these. A man\nwho has done well, can with satisfaction accept the help given him\nto do better. But to know that one has done very ill, to stand in\nthe sight of God and truth condemned, marked with the disgrace that\nthe crucifixion of the Son of God has branded on our human nature,\nwith every stain of sin in ourselves revealed in the light of His\nsacrifice, is a sore abasement. When one has been compelled to cry\nout, \"Lord, save; or I perish!\" he has not much left to plume himself\nupon. There was Saul himself, a perfect moralist, \"blameless in the\nrighteousness of the law.\" Yet he must confess, \"How to perform that\nwhich is good I find not. In me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no\ngood thing. Wretch that I am, who shall deliver me?\" Was not this\nmortifying to the proud young Pharisee, the man of strict conscience\nand high-souled moral endeavour? It was like death. And whoever has\nwith sincerity made the same attempt to attain in the strength of his\nwill to a true virtue, has tasted of this bitterness.\n\nThis however is what many cannot understand. The proud heart says,\n\"No; I will not stoop to that. I have my faults, my defects and\nerrors, not a few. But as for what you call _sin_, as for guilt and\ninborn depravity, I am not going to tax myself with anything of the\nkind. Leave me a little self-respect.\" So with the whole herd of\nthe self-complacent, half-religious Laodiceans. Once a week they\nconfess themselves \"miserable sinners,\" but their sins against God\nnever yet cost them one half hour of misery. And Paul's \"gospel is\nhid to them.\" If they read this Epistle, they cannot tell what it\nis all about; why Paul makes so much ado, why these thunderings\nof judgement, these cries of indignation, these beseechings and\nprotestings and redoubled arguments,--all because a parcel of\nfoolish Galatians wanted to play at being Jews! They are inclined\nto think with Festus, that this good Paul was a little beside\nhimself. Alas! to such men, content with the world's good opinion\nand their own, the death of Christ is made of none effect. Its moral\ngrandeur, its infinite pathos, is lost upon them. They pay it a\nconventional respect, but as for _believing_ in it, as for making\nit their own, and dying with Christ to live in Him--they have no\nidea what it means. That, they will tell you, is \"mysticism,\" and\nthey are practical men of the world. They have never gone out of\nthemselves, never discovered their moral insufficiency. These are\nthey of whom Jesus said, \"The publicans and the harlots go into the\nkingdom of God before you.\" It is our human independence, our moral\nself-conceit, that robs us of the Divine bounty. How should God give\nHis righteousness to men so well furnished with their own? \"Blessed\"\nthen \"are the poor in spirit\"; blessed are the broken in heart--poor\nenough, broken enough, bankrupt enough to stoop to a Saviour \"who\ngave Himself for our sins.\"\n\nII. Sinful men have made an _evil world_. The world, as Paul knew\nit, was evil indeed. \"The existing evil age,\" he says, the world as\nit then was, in contrast with the glory of the perfected Messianic\nkingdom.\n\nThis was a leading distinction of the rabbinical schools; and\nthe writers of the New Testament adopt it, with the necessary\nmodification, that \"the coming age,\" in their view, commences with\nthe _Parousia_, the full advent of the Messiah King.[4] The period\nthat intervenes since His first appearing is transitional, belonging\nto both eras. It is the conclusion of \"this world,\"[5] to which it\nappertains in its outward and material relations;[6] but under the\nperishing form of the present there lies hidden for the Christian\nbeliever the seed of immortality, \"the earnest\" of his future\nand complete inheritance.[7] Hence the different and seemingly\ncontradictory ways in which Scripture speaks of the world that now is.\n\n [4] 2 Thess. i. 5-7; 2 Tim. iv. 18; Heb. x. 12, 13; 1 Pet. v. 10.\n\n [5] 1 Cor. x. 11; Heb. ix. 26.\n\n [6] 1 Cor. vii. 31; 1 John ii. 17.\n\n [7] Rom. viii. 18; Eph. i. 13, 14.\n\nTo Paul at this time the world wore its darkest aspect. There is a\ntouching emphasis in the order of this clause. \"The present world,\n_evil as it is_:\" the words are a sigh for deliverance. The Epistles\nto Corinth show us how the world just now was using the Apostle.\nThe wonder is that one man could bear so much. \"We are made as the\nfilth of the world,\" he says, \"the offscouring of all things.\"[8] So\nthe world treated its greatest living benefactor. And as for his\nMaster--\"the princes of this world crucified the Lord of glory.\"\nYes, it was a bad old world, that in which Paul and the Galatians\nlived--false, licentious, cruel. And that \"evil world\" still exists.\n\n [8] 1 Cor. iv. 9-13; xv. 30, 32; 2 Cor. vi. 4, 10; xi. 16, 33.\n\nTrue, the world, as we know it, is vastly better than that of Paul's\nday. Not in vain have Apostles taught, and martyrs bled, and the\nChurch of Christ witnessed and toiled through so many ages. \"Other\nmen have laboured; we enter into their labours.\" An English home\nof to-day is the flower of the centuries. To those cradled in its\npure affections, endowed with health and honourable work and refined\ntastes, the world must be, and was meant to be, in many aspects a\nbright and pleasant world. Surely the most sorrowful have known days\nin which the sky was all sunshine and the very air alive with joy,\nwhen the world looked as when it came forth fresh from its Creator's\nhand, \"and behold, it was very good.\" There is nothing in the Bible,\nnothing in the spirit of true religion to damp the pure joy of such\ndays as these. But there are \"the days of darkness;\" and they are\nmany. The Serpent has crept into our Paradise. Death breathes on it\nhis fatal blast.\n\nAnd when we look outside the sheltered circles of home-life and\nChristian brotherhood, what a sea of misery spreads around us. How\nlimited and partial is the influence of religion. What a mass of\nunbelief and godlessness surges up to the doors of our sanctuaries.\nWhat appalling depths of iniquity exist in modern society, under the\nbrilliant surface of our material civilization. And however far the\ndominance of sin in human society may be broken--as, please God, it\nshall be broken, still evil is likely to remain in many tempting\nand perilous forms until the world is burnt to ashes in the fires\nof the Last Judgement. Is it not an evil world, where every morning\nnewspaper serves up to us its miserable tale of disaster and of\ncrime, where the Almighty's name is \"all the day blasphemed,\" and\nevery night drunkenness holds its horrid revels and the daughters\nof shame walk the city streets, where great Christian empires tax\nthe poor man's bread and make his life bitter to maintain their huge\nstanding armies and their cruel engines of war, and where, in this\nhappy England and its cities teeming with wealth, there are thousands\nof patient, honest working women, whose life under the fierce stress\nof competition is a veritable slavery, a squalid, dreary struggle\njust to keep hunger from the door? Ay, it is a world so evil that no\ngood and right-thinking man who knows it, would care to live in it\nfor a single day, but for the hope of helping to make it better.\n\nNow it was the purpose of Jesus Christ, that for those who believe\nin Him this world's evil should be brought absolutely to an end. He\npromises a full deliverance from all that tempts and afflicts us\nhere. With sin, the root of evil, removed, its bitter fruits at last\nwill disappear. We shall rise to the life immortal. We shall attain\nour perfect consummation and bliss both in body and soul. Kept from\nthe evil of the world while they remain in it, enabled by His grace\nto witness and contend against it, Christ's servants shall then be\nlifted clean out for it of ever. \"Father, I will,\" prayed Jesus,\n\"that they also whom Thou hast given Me, may be with Me where I am.\"\nTo that final salvation, accomplished in the redemption of our body\nand the setting up of Christ's heavenly kingdom, the Apostle's words\nlook forward: \"that He might deliver us _out of_ this present evil\nworld.\" This was the splendid hope which Paul offered to the dying\nand despairing world of his day. The Galatians were persuaded of it\nand embraced it; he entreats them not to let it go.\n\nThe self-sacrifice of Christ, and the deliverance it brings, are\nboth, the Apostle concludes, \"according to the will of God, even our\nFather.\" The wisdom and might of the Eternal are pledged to the work\nof human redemption. The cross of Jesus Christ is the manifesto of\nInfinite Love. Let him therefore who rejects it, know against Whom he\nis contending. Let him who perverts and falsifies it, know with what\nhe is trifling. He who receives and obeys it, may rest assured that\nall things are working for his good. For all things are in the hands\nof our God and Father; \"to Whom,\" let us say with Paul, \"be glory for\never. Amen.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n_THE ANATHEMA._\n\n \"I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called\n you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; which is\n not another _gospel_: only there are some that trouble you, and\n would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel\n from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that\n which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. As we have said\n before, so say I now again, If any man preacheth unto you any\n gospel other than that which ye received, let him be anathema.\n For am I now persuading men, or God? or am I seeking to please\n men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of\n Christ.\"--GAL. i. 6-10.\n\n\nAfter the Salutation in Paul's Epistles comes the Thanksgiving.\n\u1f18\u03c5\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6 or \u0395\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2--these are the words we expect first to meet.\nEven in writing to Corinth, where there was so much to censure and\ndeplore, he begins, \"I give thanks to my God always for you.\" This\nletter deviates from the Apostle's devout and happy usage. Not \"I\ngive thanks,\" but \"I marvel;\" not blessing, but _anathema_ is coming\nfrom his lips: a surprise that jars all the more upon one's ears,\nbecause it follows on the sublime doxology of the preceding verse.\n\"I marvel to see you so quickly falling away to another gospel....\nBut if any one preach unto you any gospel other than that ye\nreceived--ay, though it were ourselves, or an angel from heaven--I\nhave said once, and I say again, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.\"\n\nThese words were well calculated to startle the Galatians out of\ntheir levity. They are like a lightning-flash which shows one to be\nstanding on the edge of a precipice. We see at once the infinite\nseriousness of the Judaic controversy, the profound gulf that lies\nbetween Paul and his opposers. He is for open war. He is in haste\nto fling his gage of defiance against these enemies of the cross.\nWith all his tact and management, his readiness to consult the\nsusceptibilities and accommodate the scruples of sincere consciences,\nthe Apostle can find no room for conciliation here. He knows the\nsort of men he has to deal with. He perceives that the whole truth\nof the Gospel is at stake. Not circumstantials, but essentials; not\nhis personal authority, but the honour of Christ, the doctrine of the\ncross, is involved in this defection. He must speak plainly; he must\nact strongly, and at once; or the cause of the Gospel is lost. \"If\nI continued any longer to please men,\" he says, \"I should not be a\nservant of Christ.\" To stand on terms with such opponents, to palter\nwith this \"other gospel,\" would be treason against Him. There is but\none tribunal at which this quarrel can be decided. To Him \"who had\ncalled\" the Galatian believers \"in Christ's grace,\" who by the same\ngrace had called the Apostle to His service and given him the message\nhe had preached to them--to _God_ he appeals. In His name, and by the\nauthority conferred upon him and for which he must give account, he\npronounces these troublers \"anathema.\" They are enemies of Christ, by\ntheir treachery excluded from His kingdom.\n\nHowever unwelcome, however severe the course the Apostle takes,\nhe has no alternative. \"For now,\" he cries, \"is it _men_ that I\npersuade, or _God_?\" He must do his duty, let who will condemn.\nPaul was ready to go all lengths in pleasing men in consistence\nwith loyalty to Christ, where he could do it \"for their good, unto\nedification.\" But if their approval clashed with God's, then it\nbecame \"a very small thing:\"[9] he did not heed it one jot. Such is\nthe temper of mind which the Epistles to Corinth disclose in Paul\nat this juncture. In the same spirit he indites these trenchant and\ndispleasing words.\n\n [9] 1 Cor. iv. 3, 4; 2 Cor. v. 9-12; xii. 19.\n\nWith a heavy heart Paul has taken up his pen. If we judge rightly\nof the date of this letter, he had just passed through the darkest\nhour of his experience, when not his life alone, but the fate of his\nGentile mission hung in the balance. His expulsion from Ephesus,\ncoming at the same time as the Corinthian revolt, and followed by a\nprostrating attack of sickness, had shaken his soul to its depths.\nNever had his heart been so torn with anxiety, never had he felt\nhimself so beaten down and discomfited, as on that melancholy journey\nfrom Ephesus to Macedonia.[10] \"Out of anguish of heart and with\nmany tears\" and after-relentings (2 Cor. ii. 4; vii. 8) he wrote\nhis First letter to Corinth. And this Epistle is even more severe.\nThere runs through it a peculiar mental tension, an exaltation of\nfeeling such as prolonged and deep suffering leaves behind in a\nnature like Paul's. \"The marks of Jesus\" (ch. vi. 17) are visible,\nimpressed on his spirit no less than on his body. The Apostle's\nheart is full to overflowing. Its warm glow is felt under the calmer\ncourse of narrative and argument: while at the beginning and end of\nthe Epistle it breaks forth in language of burning indignation and\nmelting pathos. Before advancing a single step, before entering on\nany sort of explanation or discussion, his grief at the fickleness of\nhis Galatian children and his anger against their seducers must find\nexpression.\n\n [10] 2 Cor. i. 8-10; ii. 12, 13; iv. 8-11; vii. 5-7.\n\nThese sentences demand, before we proceed further, a few words of\nexegetical definition. For the reference of \"so quickly\" it is\nneedless to go beyond the verb it qualifies. The Apostle cannot\nsurely mean, \"_so soon_ falling away (after your conversion).\" For\nthe Galatian Churches had been founded five, if not seven, years\nbefore this time; and the backsliding of recent converts is less, and\nnot more, surprising than of established believers. What astonishes\nPaul is the _suddenness_ of this movement, the facility with which\nthe Galatians yielded to the Judaizing \"persuasion,\" the rapid spread\nof this new leaven. As to the double \"other\" (\u1f15\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, _different_,\nR.V.--\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf) of vv. 6 and 7, and the connection of the idiomatic\n\"only\" (\u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03ae, _except_),--we regard the second _other_ as an abrupt\ncorrection of the first; while the _only_ clause, extending to the\nend of ver. 7, mediates between the two, qualifying the statement\n\"There is no other gospel,\" by showing in what sense the writer at\nfirst had spoken of \"another.\" \"Ye are falling away,\" says he, \"to\nanother sort of gospel--which is not another, except that there\nare certain that trouble you and would fain pervert the gospel of\nChrist.\" The word _gospel_ is therefore in the first instance applied\nironically. Paul yields the sacred title up to his opponents, only\nto snatch it out of their false hands. \"_Another_ gospel! there\nis only one; although there are men that falsify it, and seek to\nfoist something else upon you in its name.\" Seven times in this\ncontext (vv. 6-11) does the Apostle reiterate, in noun or verb, this\nprecious word, as though he could not let it go. A strange sort\nof \"good news\" for the Galatians, that they must be circumcised\nforsooth, and observe the Jewish Kalendar! (ch. v. 2, 3; vi. 12; iv.\n9, 10.)\n\nI. In Paul's view, there is but one gospel for mankind. _The gospel\nof Jesus Christ bears a fixed, inviolable character._\n\nOn this position the whole teaching of Paul rests,--and with it, may\nwe not add, Christianity itself? However variously we may formulate\nthe essentials of a Christian man's faith, we are generally agreed\nthat there are such essentials, and that they are found in Paul's\ngospel to the Gentiles. With him the good tidings about Christ\nconstituted a very definite and, as we should say, _dogmatic_ body of\ntruth. In whatever degree his gospel has been confused and overlaid\nby later teachings, to his own mind its terms were perfectly clear,\nand its authority incontestable. With all its breadth, there is\nnothing nebulous, nothing limp or hesitating about the theology of\nPaul. In its main doctrines it is fixed and hard as adamant; and at\nthe challenge of this Judaistic perversion it rings out an instant\nand peremptory denial. It was the ark of God on which the Jewish\ntroublers laid their unholy hands. \"Christ's grace\" is lodged in\nit. God's call to mankind was conveyed by these \"good tidings.\" The\nChurches which the Apostle had planted were \"God's husbandry, God's\nbuilding;\" and woe to the man who tampered with the work, or sought\nto lay another foundation than that which had been laid (1 Cor.\niii. 5-11). To distort or mutilate \"the word of the truth of the\ngospel,\" to make it mean now one thing and now another, to disturb\nthe faith of half-instructed Christians by captious reasonings and\nself-interested perversions, was a capital offence, a sin against\nGod and a crime against humanity. Paul possesses in his gospel truth\nof unspeakable value to mankind, the supreme revelation of God's\nmercy to the world. And he is prepared to launch his anathema against\nevery wilful impugner, no matter what his pretensions, or the quarter\nfrom which he comes.\n\n\"Well,\" it may be said, \"this is sheer religious intolerance. Paul is\ndoing what every dogmatist, every ecclesiastical bigot has done in\nhis turn. His beliefs are, to be sure, _the_ truth; and accordingly\nhe unchurches and anathematizes those who cannot agree with him.\nWith all his nobility of mind, there is in Paul a leaven of Jewish\nrancour. He falls short of the sweet reasonableness of Jesus.\" So\nsome will say, and in saying claim to represent the mild and tolerant\nspirit of our age. But is there not in every age an intolerance that\nis just and necessary? There is a logical intolerance of sophistry\nand trifling. There is a moral intolerance of impurity and deceit.\nAnd there is a religious intolerance, which includes both these and\nadds to them a holy jealousy for the honour of God and the spiritual\nwelfare of mankind. It is mournful indeed to think how many crimes\nhave been perpetrated under the cloak of pious zeal. _Tantum Religio\npotuit suadere malorum._ The corruption of Christianity by human\npride and cruelty has furnished copious illustrations of the terrible\nline of Lucretius. But the perversion of this noblest instinct of\nthe soul does not take away either its reasonableness or its use.\nThe quality of a passion is one thing; the mode of its expression is\nanother. The hottest fires of bigotry are cold when compared with the\nscorching intolerance of Christ's denunciations of the Pharisees.\nThe anathemas of Jesus and of Paul are very different from those of\narrogant pontiffs, or of narrow sectaries, inflamed with the idolatry\nof their own opinions. After all, the zeal of the rudest fanatic in\nreligion has more in it of manly worth and moral capability than\nthe languors of a blas\u00e9 scepticism, that sits watching with amused\ncontempt the strife of creeds and the search of human hearts after\nthe Living God. There is an idle, listless, cowardly tolerance, as\nthere is an intolerance that is noble and just.\n\nThe _one gospel_ has had many interpreters. Their voices, it must\nbe confessed, sound strangely discordant. While the teachings of\nChristianity excite so intensely a multitude of different minds, of\nevery variety of temper and capacity, contradiction will inevitably\narise. Nothing is easier than to scoff at \"the Babel of religious\nopinions.\" Christian truth is necessarily refracted and discoloured\nin passing through disordered natures and defective minds. And, alas,\nthat Church which claims to hold the truth without possibility of\nerror or variation, has perverted Christ's gospel most of all.\n\nBut notwithstanding all differences, there exists a large and an\nincreasing measure of agreement amongst the great body of earnest\nChristians. Slowly, yet surely, one debate after another comes to\nits settlement. The noise and publicity with which discussion on\nmatters of faith is carried on in an age of religious freedom, and\nwhen liberty of thought has outrun mental discipline, should not\nlead us to exaggerate the extent of our disagreements. In the midst\nof human controversy and error, the Spirit of truth is carrying on\nHis work. He is the supreme witness of Jesus Christ. And He abides\nwith us for ever. The newly awakened historical conscience of our\ntimes is visibly making for unity. The Church is going back to the\nNew Testament. And the more thoroughly she does this, the more\ndirectly and truthfully she addresses herself to the original record\nand comes face to face with Christ and His Apostles there, so much\nthe more shall we realize the oneness and certainty of \"the faith\nonce delivered to the saints.\" Beneath the many superstructures,\nfaulty and changing in their form, we reach the one \"foundation of\nthe apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief\ncorner-stone.\" There we touch solid rock. \"The unity of the faith\"\nlies in \"the knowledge of the Son of God.\" Of Him we shall learn most\nfrom those who knew Him best. Let us transport ourselves into the\nfellowship of His first disciples; and listen to His gospel as it\ncame fresh from the lips of Peter and John and Paul, and the Divine\nMaster Himself. Let us bid the voices of the centuries be silent,\nthat we may _hear Him_.\n\nFor the Galatian readers, as for Paul, there could be but _one\ngospel_. By his voice the call of God had reached their hearts, (ver.\n6; ch. v. 8). The witness of the Spirit of God and of Christ in the\nsupernatural gifts they had received, and in the manifold fruit of\na regenerate life (ch. iii. 2-5; v. 22, 23), was evidence to them\nthat the Apostle's message was \"the true gospel of the grace of God.\"\nThis they had gratefully acknowledged at the time of his first visit\n(ch. iv. 15). The proclamation of the crucified and risen Christ had\nbrought to them unspeakable blessing. Through it they received the\nknowledge of God; they were made consciously sons of God, heirs of\nlife eternal (ch. iii. 26; iv. 6-9; vi. 8). To entertain any other\ngospel, after this experience and all these professions, was an act\nof apostasy. \"Ye are deserting (like runaway soldiers), _turning\nrenegades_ from God:\" such is the language in which Paul taxes\nhis readers. In listening to the persuasion of the Judaists, they\nwere \"disobeying the truth\" (ch. v. 7, 8). They were disloyal to\nconscience; they were trifling with the most sacred convictions of\ntheir lives, and with the testimony of the Spirit of God. They were\nforgetting the cross of Christ, and making His death of none effect.\nSurely they must have been \"bewitched\" to act thus; some deadly spell\nwas upon them, which had laid memory and conscience both to sleep\n(ch. ii. 21-iii. 3).\n\nThe nature and the contents of the two \"gospels\" current in Galatia\nwill be made clear in the further course of the Epistle. They were\nthe gospels of Grace and of Law respectively; of Salvation by Faith,\nand by Works; of life in the Spirit, and in the Flesh; of the Cross\nand the Resurrection on the one hand, and of Circumcision and the\nKalendar and \"Clean meats\" on the other; the gospels of inwardness,\nand of externalism--of Christ, and of self. The conflict between\nthese two was the great struggle of Paul's life. His success was,\nhistorically speaking, the salvation of Christianity.\n\nBut this contention did not end with his victory. The Judaistic\nperversion appealed to tendencies too persistent in our nature to\nbe crushed at one blow. The gospel of externalism is dear to the\nhuman heart. It may take the form of culture and moralities; or of\n\"services\" and sacraments and churchly order; or of orthodoxy and\nphilanthropy. These and such things make themselves our idols; and\ntrust in them takes the place of Faith in the living Christ. It is\nnot enough that the eyes of our heart should once have seen the\nLord, that we should in other days have experienced \"the renewing of\nthe Holy Ghost.\" It is possible to forget, possible to \"remove from\nHim that called us in the grace of Christ.\" With little change in\nthe form of our religious life, its inward reality of joy in God,\nof conscious sonship, of fellowship in the Spirit, may be utterly\ndeparted. The gospel of formalism will spring up and flourish on the\nmost evangelical soil, and in the most strictly Pauline Churches.\nLet it be banned and barred out never so completely, it knows how to\nfind entrance, under the simplest modes of worship and the soundest\ndoctrine. The serried defence of Articles and Confessions constructed\nagainst it will not prevent its entrance, and may even prove its\ncover and intrenchment. Nothing avails, as the Apostle says, but a\nconstant \"new creation.\" The life of God in human souls is sustained\nby the energy of His Spirit, perpetually renewed, ever proceeding\nfrom the Father and the Son. \"The life that I live in the flesh, I\nlive by the Faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself\nfor me.\" This is the true orthodoxy. The vitality of his personal\nfaith in Christ kept Paul safe from error, faithful in will and\nintellect to the _one gospel_.\n\nII. We have still to consider the import of _the judgement pronounced\nby Paul upon those who pervert the gospel of Christ_. \"Let him be\nanathema. Even should it be ourselves, or an angel from heaven, _let\nhim be anathema_.\"\n\nThese are tremendous words. Commentators have been shocked at the\nApostle's damning his opponents after this fashion, and have sought\nto lighten the weight of this awful sentence. It has been sometimes\ntoned down into an act of excommunication or ecclesiastical\ncensure. But this explanation will not hold. Paul could not think\nof subjecting \"an angel\" to a penalty like that. He pronounced\nexcommunication against disorderly members of the Thessalonian\nChurch; and in 1 Cor. v. 1-8 he gives directions for the carrying\nout of a similar decree, attended with severe bodily affliction\nsupernaturally adjudged, against a sinner whose presence grossly\nstained the purity of the Church. But this sentence goes beyond\neither of those. It contemplates the exclusion of the offenders from\nthe Covenant of grace, their loss of final salvation.\n\nThrice besides has Paul used this ominous word. The cry \"Jesus is\nanathema,\" in 1 Cor. xii. 3, reveals with a lurid effect the frenzied\nmalignity towards Christ of which the spirit of evil is sometimes\ncapable. In a very different connection the word appears in Rom. ix.\n3; where Paul \"could wish himself anathema from Christ,\" if that were\npossible, for his brethren's sake; he could find it in his heart\nto be cut off for ever from that love of God in Christ of which\nhe has just spoken in terms of unbounded joy and confidence (Rom.\nviii. 31-39), and banished from the heavenly kingdom, if through his\nexclusion his Jewish kindred might be saved. Self-sacrifice can go no\nfurther. No heavier loss than this could be conceived for any human\nbeing. Nearest to our passage is the imprecation at the end of 1\nCorinthians: \"If any man love not the Lord, let him be anathema,\"--a\njudgement proclaimed against cold and false hearts, knowing His love,\nbearing His name, but with no true love to Him.\n\nThis Greek word in its Biblical use has grown out of the _ch\u00e9rem_ of\nthe Old Testament, the _ban_ declared against that which was cut off\nfrom the Divine mercies and exposed to the full sweep of judgement.\nThus in Deut. xiii. 12-18, the city whose people should \"go and\nserve other gods,\" is declared _ch\u00e9rem (anathema)_, an \"accursed,\"\nor \"devoted thing\" (R.V.), on which ensues its destruction by sword\nand fire, leaving it to remain \"a ruin-heap for ever.\" Similarly in\nJoshua vi., vii., the spoil of Jericho is _anathema_, Achan's theft\nis therefore _anathema_, and Israel is made by it _anathema_ until\n\"the accursed thing is destroyed\" from among the people. Such were\nthe recollections associated with this word in the Mosaic law, which\nit would inevitably carry with it to the minds of those against whom\nit was now directed. And there is nothing in later Jewish usage to\nmitigate its force.\n\nNow the Apostle is not writing like a man in a passion, who flings\nout his words as missiles, eager only to wound and confound his\nopponents. He repeats the sentence. He quotes it as one that he\nhad already affirmed in the hearing of his readers. The passage\nbears the marks of well-weighed thought and judicial solemnity. In\npronouncing this judgement on \"the troublers,\" Paul acts under the\nsense of Apostolic responsibility. We must place the sentence in\nthe same line as that of Peter against Ananias and Sapphira, and\nof Paul himself against Elymas the Cypriot sorcerer, and against\nthe incestuous Corinthian. In each case there is a supernatural\ninsight and authorization, \"the authority which the Lord gave\" and\nwhich is wielded by His inspired Apostle. The exercise of this\njudicial function was one of \"the signs of the Apostle.\" This was\nthe proof of \"Christ speaking in him\" which Paul was so loth to give\nat Corinth,[11] but which at this crisis of his ministry he was\ncompelled to display. And if he \"reckons to be bold against\" his\nadversaries in Galatia, he knows well the ground on which he stands.\n\n [11] 2 Cor. x. 1-11; xiii. 1-10; 1 Cor. iv. 18-21.\n\nHis anathema struck at men who were the worst enemies of Christ. \"We\ncan do nothing against the truth,\" he says; \"but for the truth\" he\nwas ready to do and dare everything,--to \"come with a rod,\" as he\ntells the proud Corinthians. There was no authority, however lofty,\nthat he was not warranted to use on Christ's behalf, no measure,\nhowever severe, from which he would shrink, if it were required\nin defence of the truth of the Gospel. \"He possesses weapons, not\nfleshly, but mighty through God\"; and he is prepared to bring them\nall into play rather than see the gospel perverted or overthrown.\nPaul will hurl his anathema at the prince of the archangels, should\nHe come \"preaching another gospel,\" tempting his children from their\nallegiance to Christ. This bolt was not shot a moment too soon.\nLaunched against the legalist conspiracy, and followed up by the\narguments of this and the Roman Epistle, it saved the Church from\nbeing overpowered by reactionary Judaism. The Apostle's judgement\nhas marked the gospel of the cross for all time as God's inviolable\ntruth, guarded by lightnings.\n\nThe sentences of judgement pronounced by the Apostles present a\nstriking contrast to those that have fulminated from the Chair of\ntheir self-styled successors. In the Canons of the Council of Trent,\nfor example, we have counted one hundred and thirty-five anathemas.\nA large proportion of these are concerned with the rights of the\npriesthood; others with complicated and secondary points of doctrine;\nsome are directed virtually against the teaching of Paul himself.\nHere is one specimen: \"If any one shall say that justifying faith\nis nothing else but a trust in the Divine mercy, remitting sins\nfor Christ's sake, or that it is this trust alone by which we are\njustified: let him be anathema.\"[12] Again, \"If any one shall say\nthat the Canon of the Mass contains errors, and therefore should be\nabrogated: let him be anathema.\"[13] In the closing session, the\nfinal act of the presiding Cardinal was to pronounce, \"Anathema to\nall heretics;\" to which the assembled prelates shouted in response,\n\"Anathema, anathema.\" With this imprecation on their lips the Fathers\nof the Church concluded their pious labours. It was the Reformation,\nit was \"the liberty of the sons of God\" that Rome anathematized.\nPaul's censure holds good against all the Conciliar Canons and Papal\nBulls that contravene it. But twice has he pronounced this awful\nword; once against any that \"love not the Lord,\" a second time\nupon those who wilfully pervert His gospel. The Papal anathemas\nsound like the maledictions of an angry priesthood, jealous for its\nprerogatives; here we have the holy severity of an inspired Apostle,\nconcerned only for the truth, and for his Master's honour. There\nspeaks the conscious \"lord over God's heritage,\" wearing the triple\ncrown, wielding the powers of Interdict and Inquisition, whose\nword sets armies in motion and makes kings tremble on their seats.\nHere a feeble, solitary man, \"his bodily presence weak, his speech\ncontemptible,\" hunted from place to place, scourged and stoned,\nshut up for years in prison, who could not, except for love's sake,\ncommand the meanest service. How conspicuous in the one case, how\nwanting in the other, is the might of the Spirit and the dignity of\nthe inspired word, the transcendence of moral authority.\n\n [12] Session vi., Can. xii.\n\n [13] Session xxii., Can. vi.\n\nIt is _the moral conduct_ of those he judges that determines in\neach case the sentence passed by the Apostle. For a man knowing\nJesus Christ, as we presume the members of the Corinthian Church did\nknow Him, not to love Him, argues a bad heart. Must not we count\n_ourselves_ accursed, if with our knowledge of Christ we had no love\nfor Him? Such a man is already virtually _anathema_. He is severed\nas a branch from its vine, ready to be gathered for the burning\n(John xv. 6). And these Galatian disturbers were something worse\nthan mere mistaken enthusiasts for their native Jewish rites. Their\npolicy was dishonourable (ch. iv. 17). They made the gospel of Christ\nsubservient to factious designs. They sought to win credit with\ntheir fellow-countrymen and to escape the reproach of the cross by\nimposing circumcision on the Gentiles (ch. ii. 4; vi. 12, 13). They\nprostituted religion to selfish and party purposes. They sacrificed\ntruth to popularity, the glory of Christ and the cross to their\nown. They were of those whom the Apostle describes as \"walking in\ncraftiness and handling the word of God deceitfully,\" who \"traffic\"\nin the gospel, peddling with it as with petty wares, cheapening and\nadulterating it like dishonest hucksters to make their own market by\nit (2 Cor. ii. 17; iv. 2). Did not Paul do well to smite them with\nthe rod of his mouth? Justly has he marked with the brand of this\nfiery anathema the false minister, \"who serves not the Lord Christ,\nbut his own belly.\"\n\nBut does this declaration preclude in such a case the possibility of\nrepentance? We trow not. It declares the doom which is due to any,\nbe he man or angel, who should do what these \"troublers\" are doing.\nIt is a general sentence, and has for the individuals concerned\nthe effect of a warning, like the announcement made concerning the\nTraitor at the Last Supper. However unlikely repentance might be in\neither instance, there is nothing to forbid it. So when Peter said to\nSimon Magus, \"Thy money perish with thee!\" he nevertheless continued,\n\"Repent, therefore, of this thy wickedness, and pray the Lord, if\nperhaps the thought of thy heart shall be forgiven thee\" (Acts viii.\n20-22). To his worst opponents, on any sign of contrition, Paul, we\nmay be sure, would have gladly said the same.\n\n\n\n\n_THE PERSONAL HISTORY._\n\nCHAPTER i. 11-ii. 21.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n_PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST._\n\n \"For I make known to you, brethren, as touching the gospel which\n was preached by me, that it is not after man. For neither did\n I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but _it came to\n me_ through revelation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of\n my manner of life in time past in the Jews' religion, how that\n beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and made havock\n of it: and I advanced in the Jews' religion beyond many of mine\n own age among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous for\n the traditions of my fathers.\"--GAL. i. 11-14.\n\n\nHere the Epistle begins in its main purport. What has gone before is\nso much exordium. The sharp, stern sentences of vv. 6-10 are like the\nroll of artillery that ushers in the battle. The mists rise from the\nfield. We see the combatants arrayed on either side. In due order and\nwith cool self-command the Apostle proceeds to marshal and deploy\nhis forces. His truthful narrative corrects the misrepresentations\nof his opponents, and repels their attack upon himself. His\npowerful dialectic wrests from their hands and turns against them\ntheir weapons of Scriptural proof. He wins the citadel of their\nposition, by establishing the claim of the men of faith to be the\nsons of Abraham. On the ruins of confuted legalism he builds up an\nimpregnable fortress for Christian liberty, an immortal vindication\nof the gospel of the grace of God.\n\nThe cause of Gentile freedom at this crisis was bound up with the\nperson of the Apostle Paul. His Gospel and his Apostleship must stand\nor fall together. The former was assailed through the latter. He was\nhimself just now \"the pillar and stay of the truth.\" If his character\nhad been successfully attacked and his influence destroyed, nothing,\nhumanly speaking, could have saved Gentile Christendom at this\ndecisive moment from falling under the assaults of Judaism. When he\nbegins his crucial appeal with the words, \"Behold, _I Paul_ say unto\nyou\" (ch. v. 2), we feel that the issue depends upon the weight which\nhis readers may attach to his personal affirmation. He pits his own\ntruthfulness, his knowledge of Christ, his spiritual discernment and\nauthority, and the respect due to himself from the Galatians, against\nthe pretensions of the new teachers. The comparison is not indeed\nso open and express as that made in 2 Corinthians; none the less it\ntacitly runs through this Epistle. Paul is compelled to put himself\nin the forefront of his argument. In the eyes of his children in the\nfaith, he is bound to vindicate his Apostolic character, defamed by\nJewish malice and untruth.\n\nThe first two chapters of this Epistle are therefore Paul's _Apologia\npro vita sua_. With certain chapters in 2 Corinthians, and scattered\npassages in other letters, they form the Apostle's autobiography, one\nof the most perfect self-portraitures that literature contains. They\nreveal to us the man more effectively than any ostensible description\ncould have done. They furnish an indispensable supplement to the\nexternal and cursory delineations given in the Acts of the Apostles.\nWhile Luke skilfully presents the outward framework of Paul's life\nand the events of his public career, it is to the Epistles that we\nturn--to none more frequently than this--for the necessary subjective\ndata, for all that belongs to his inner character, his motives and\nprinciples. This Epistle brings into bold relief the Apostle's moral\nphysiognomy. Above all, it throws a clear and penetrating light on\nthe event which determined his career--the greatest event in the\nhistory of Christianity after the Day of Pentecost--Paul's conversion\nto faith in the Lord Jesus.\n\nThis was at once the turning-point in the Apostle's life, and the\nbirth-hour of his gospel. If the Galatians were to understand his\nteaching, they must understand this occurrence; they must know why he\nbecame a Christian, how he had received the message which he brought\nto them. They would, he felt sure, enter more sympathetically into\nhis doctrine, if they were better acquainted with the way in which\nhe had arrived at it. They would see how well-justified was the\nauthority, how needful the severity with which he writes. Accordingly\nhe begins with a brief relation of the circumstances of his call\nto the service of Christ, and his career from the days of his\nJudaistic zeal, when he made havoc of the faith, till the well-known\noccasion on which he became its champion against Peter himself, the\nchief of the Twelve (ch. i. 11-ii. 21.) His object in this recital\nappears to be threefold: to refute the misrepresentations of the\nCircumcisionists; to vindicate his independent authority as an\nApostle of Christ; and further, to unfold the nature and terms of his\ngospel, so as to pave the way for the theological argument which is\nto follow, and which forms the body of the Epistle.\n\nI. _Paul's gospel was supernaturally conveyed to him, by a personal\nintervention of Jesus Christ._ This assertion is the Apostle's\nstarting-point. \"My gospel is not after man. I received it as Jesus\nChrist revealed it to me.\"\n\nThat the initial revelation was made to him by Christ in person, was\na fact of incalculable importance for Paul. This had made him an\nApostle, in the august sense in which he claims the title (ver. 1).\nThis accounts for the vehemence with which he defends his doctrine,\nand for the awful sentence which he has passed upon its impugners.\nThe Divine authorship of the gospel he preached made it impossible\nfor him to temporize with its perverters, or to be influenced by\nhuman favour or disfavour in its administration. Had his teaching\nbeen \"according to man,\" he might have consented to a compromise;\nhe might reasonably have tried to humour and accommodate Jewish\nprejudices. But the case is far otherwise. \"I am not at liberty\nto please men,\" he says, \"for my gospel comes directly from Jesus\nChrist\" (vv. 10, 11). So he \"gives\" his readers \"to know,\" as if by\nway of formal notification.[14]\n\n [14] Comp. Rom. ix. 22; 1 Cor. xii. 3; xv. 1; 2 Cor. viii. 1.\n\nThe gospel of Paul was inviolable, then, because of its superhuman\ncharacter. And this character was impressed upon it by its superhuman\norigin: \"not according to man, for neither _from man_ did I receive\nit, nor was I taught it, but by a revelation of Jesus Christ.\" The\nApostle's knowledge of Christianity did not come through the ordinary\nchannel of tradition and indoctrination; Jesus Christ had, by a\nmiraculous interposition, taught him the truth about Himself. He\nsays, \"Neither did _I_,\" with an emphasis that points tacitly to the\nelder Apostles, whom he mentions a few sentences later (ver. 17). To\nthis comparison his adversaries forced him, making use of it as they\nfreely did to his disparagement.[15] But it comes in by implication\nrather than direct assertion. Only by putting violence upon himself,\nand with strong expressions of his unworthiness, can Paul be brought\nto set his official claims in competition with those of the Twelve.\nNotwithstanding, it is perfectly clear that he puts his ministry on\na level with theirs. He is no Apostle at second-hand, no disciple of\nPeter's or dependant of the \"pillars\" at Jerusalem. \"Neither did I,\"\nhe declares, \"any more than they, take my instructions from other\nlips than those of Jesus our Lord.\"\n\n [15] See ch. ii. 6-14; 1 Cor. i. 12; iii. 22; iv. 9; ix. 1-5; xv.\n 8-10.\n\nBut what of this \"revelation of Jesus Christ,\" on which Paul lays\nso much stress? Does he mean a revelation made _by_ Christ, or\n_about_ Christ? Taken by itself, the expression, in Greek as in\nEnglish, bears either interpretation. In favour of the second\nconstruction--viz. that Paul speaks of a revelation by which Christ\nwas made known to him--the language of ver. 16 is adduced: \"It\npleased God to reveal His Son in me.\" Paul's general usage points in\nthe same direction. With him Christ is the _object_ of manifestation,\npreaching, and the like. 2 Cor. xii. 1 is probably an instance to the\ncontrary: \"I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.\"[16]\nBut it should be observed that wherever this genitive is objective\n(a revelation revealing Christ), _God_ appears in the context, just\nas in ver. 16 below, to Whom the authorship of the revelation is\nascribed. In this instance, _the gospel_ is the object revealed;\nand _Jesus Christ_, in contrast with man, is claimed for its Author.\nSo at the outset (ver. 1) Christ, in His Divine character, was the\n_Agent_ by whom Paul, as veritably as the Twelve, had received his\nApostleship. We therefore assent to the ordinary view, reading this\npassage in the light of the vision of Jesus thrice related in the\nActs.[17] We understand Paul to say that no _mere man_ imparted to\nhim the gospel he preached, but _Jesus Christ revealed it_.\n\n [16] This genitive is, however, open to the other construction,\n which is unquestionable in 1 Cor. i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7; also 1\n Pet. i. 7, 13. Rev. i. 1 furnishes a prominent example of the\n _subjective_ genitive.\n\n [17] Acts ix. 1-19; xxii. 5-16; xxvi. 12-18.\n\nOn the Damascus road the Apostle Paul found his mission. The vision\nof the glorified Jesus made him a Christian, and an Apostle. The act\nwas a _revelation_--that is, in New Testament phrase, a supernatural,\nan immediately Divine communication of truth. And it was a revelation\nnot conveyed in the first instance, as were the ordinary prophetic\ninspirations, through the Spirit; \"Jesus Christ,\" in His Divine-human\nperson, made Himself known to His persecutor. Paul had \"seen that\nJust One and heard a voice from His mouth.\"\n\nThe appearance of Jesus to Saul of Tarsus was in itself a gospel,\nan earnest of the good tidings he was to convey to the world. \"Why\npersecutest thou Me?\" that Divine voice said, in tones of reproach,\nyet of infinite pity. The sight of Jesus the Lord, meeting Saul's\neyes, revealed His grace and truth to the persecutor's heart. He\nwas brought in a moment to the obedience of faith; he said, \"Lord,\nwhat wilt Thou have me to do?\" He \"confessed with his mouth the Lord\nJesus\"; he \"believed in his heart that God had raised Him from the\ndead.\" It was true, after all, that \"God had made\" the crucified\nNazarene \"both Lord and Christ;\" for this was He!\n\nThe cross, which had been Saul's stumbling-block, deeply affronting\nhis Jewish pride, from this moment was transformed. The glory of the\nexalted Redeemer cast back its light upon the tree of shame. The\ncurse of the Law visibly resting upon Him, the rejection of men,\nmarked Him out as God's chosen sacrifice for sin. This explanation at\nonce presented itself to an instructed and keenly theological mind\nlike Saul's, so soon as it was evident that Jesus was not accursed,\nas he had supposed, but approved by God. So Paul's gospel was given\nhim at a stroke. Jesus Christ dying for our sins, Jesus Christ living\nto save and to rule--behold \"the good news\"! The Apostle had it on no\nless authority than that of the risen Saviour. From Him he received\nit to publish wide as the world.\n\nThus Saul of Tarsus was born again. And with the Christian man, the\nChristian thinker, the theologian, was born in him. The Pauline\ndoctrine has its root in Paul's conversion. It was a single, organic\ngrowth, the seed of which was this \"revelation of Jesus Christ.\"\nIts creative impulse was given in the experience of the memorable\nhour, when \"God who said, Light shall shine out of darkness, in the\nface of Jesus Christ shined\" into Saul's heart. As the light of\nthis revelation penetrated his spirit, he recognised, step by step,\nthe fact of the resurrection, the import of the crucifixion, the\nDivinity of Jesus, His human mediatorship, the virtue of faith, the\noffice of the Holy Spirit, the futility of Jewish ritual and works\nof law, and all the essential principles of his theology. Given the\ngenius of Saul and his religious training, and the Pauline system of\ndoctrine was, one might almost say, _a necessary deduction_ from the\nfact of the appearance to him of the glorified Jesus. If that form\nof celestial splendour was Jesus, then He was risen indeed; then He\nwas the Christ; He was, as He affirmed, the Son of God. If He was\nLord and Christ, and yet died by the Father's will on the cross of\nshame, then His death could only be a propitiation, accepted by God,\nfor the sins of men, whose efficacy had no limit, and whose merit\nleft no room for legal works of righteousness. If this Jesus was\nthe Christ, then the assumptions of Saul's Judaism, which had led\nhim into blasphemous hatred and outrage towards Him, were radically\nfalse; he will purge himself from the \"old leaven,\" that his life may\nbecome \"a new lump.\" From that moment a world of life and thought\nbegan for the future Apostle, the opposite in all respects of that\nin which hitherto he had moved. \"The old things,\" he cries, \"passed\naway; lo, they have become new\" (2 Cor. v. 17). Paul's conversion was\nas complete as it was sudden.\n\nThis intimate relation of doctrine and experience gives to\nPaul's teaching a peculiar warmth and freshness, a vividness of\nhuman reality which it everywhere retains, despite its lofty\nintellectualism and the scholastic form in which it is largely\ncast. It is theology alive, trembling with emotion, speaking words\nlike flames, forming dogmas hard as rock, that when you touch them\nare yet glowing with the heat of those central depths of the human\nspirit from which they were cast up. The collision of the two great\nApostles at Antioch shows how the strength of Paul's teaching lay\nin his inward realization of the truth. There was _life_ behind his\ndoctrine. He was, and for the time the Jewish Apostle was not, acting\nand speaking out of the reality of spiritual conviction, of truth\npersonally verified. Of the Apostle Paul above all divines the saying\nis true, _Pectus facit theologum_. And this personal knowledge of\nChrist, \"the master light of all his seeing,\" began when on the way\nto Damascus his eyes beheld Jesus our Lord. His farewell charge to\nthe Church through Timothy (2 Tim. i. 9-12), while referring to the\ngeneral manifestation of Christ to the world, does so in language\ncoloured by the recollection of the peculiar revelation made at the\nbeginning to himself: \"God,\" he says, \"called us with a holy calling,\naccording to His purpose and grace, which hath now been manifested by\nthe appearing[18] of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who abolished death\nand brought life and immortality to light[19] through the gospel,\nwhereunto _I_ was appointed a preacher and apostle. For which cause\nI also suffer these things. But I am not ashamed: for I _know_ Him\nin whom I have believed.\" This manifestation of the celestial Christ\nshed its brightness along all his path.\n\n [18] \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, a supernatural appearance, such as that of the\n Second Advent.\n\n [19] \u03a6\u03c9\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, comp. 2 Cor. iv. 6.\n\nII. His assertion of the Divine origin of his doctrine Paul\nsustains by referring to _the previous course of his life_. There\nwas certainly nothing in that to account for his preaching Christ\ncrucified. \"For you have heard,\" he continues, \"of my manner of life\naforetime, when I followed Judaism.\"\n\nHere ends the chain of _fors_ reaching from ver. 10 to 13--a\nsuccession of explanations linking Paul's denunciation of the\nChristian Judaizers to the fact that he had himself been a violent\nanti-Christian Judaist. The seeming contradiction is in reality a\nconsistent sequence. Only one who had imbibed the spirit of legalism\nas Saul of Tarsus had done, could justly appreciate the hostility of\nits principles to the new faith, and the sinister motives actuating\nthe men who pretended to reconcile them. Paul knew Judaism by\nheart. He understood the sort of men who opposed him in the Gentile\nChurches. And if his anathema appear needlessly severe, we must\nremember that no one was so well able to judge of the necessities of\nthe case as the man who pronounced it.\n\n\"You have heard\"--from whom? In the first instance, probably,\nfrom Paul himself. But on this matter, we may be pretty sure, his\nopponents would have something to say. They did not scruple to assert\nthat he \"still preached circumcision\"[20] and played the Jew even now\nwhen it suited him, charging him with insincerity. Or they might say,\n\"Paul is a renegade. Once the most ardent of zealots for Judaism, he\nhas passed to the opposite extreme. He is a man you cannot trust.\nApostates are proverbially bitter against their old faith.\" In these\nand in other ways Paul's Pharisaic career was doubtless thrown in his\nteeth.\n\n [20] Ch. v. 11; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 20; Acts xvi. 3; xxi. 20-26;\n xxiii. 6.\n\nThe Apostle sorrowfully confesses \"that above measure he persecuted\nthe Church of God and laid it waste.\" His friend Luke makes the same\nadmission in similar language.[21] There is no attempt to conceal\nor palliate this painful fact, that the famous Apostle of the\nGentiles had been a persecutor, the deadliest enemy of the Church\nin its infant days. He was the very type of a determined, pitiless\noppressor, the forerunner of the Jewish fanatics who afterwards\nsought his life, and of the cruel bigots of the Inquisition and the\nStar-chamber in later times. His restless energy, his indifference\nto the feelings of humanity in this work of destruction, were due to\nreligious zeal. \"I thought,\" he says, \"I ought to do many things\ncontrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.\" In him, as in so many\nothers, the saying of Christ was fulfilled: \"The time cometh, when\nwhoso killeth you will think that he is offering a sacrifice to\nGod.\" These Nazarenes were heretics, traitors to Israel, enemies of\nGod. Their leader had been crucified, branded with the extremest\nmark of Divine displeasure. His followers must perish. Their success\nmeant the ruin of Mosaism. God willed their destruction. Such were\nSaul's thoughts, until he heard the protesting voice of Jesus as he\napproached Damascus to ravage His little flock. No wonder that he\nsuffered remorse to the end of his days.\n\n [21] Acts vii. 58; viii. 1-3; ix. 1.\n\nSaul's persecution of the Church was the natural result of his\nearlier training, of the course to which in his youth he committed\nhimself. The Galatians had heard also \"how proficient he was in\nJudaism, beyond many of his kindred and age; that he was surpassed\nby none in zeal for their ancestral traditions.\" His birth (Phil.\niii. 4, 5), education (Acts xxii. 3), temperament, circumstances,\nall combined to make him a zealot of the first water, the pink and\npattern of Jewish orthodoxy, the rising hope of the Pharisaic party,\nand an instrument admirably fitted to crush the hated and dangerous\nsect of the Nazarenes. These facts go to prove, not that Paul is a\ntraitor to his own people, still less that he is a Pharisee at heart,\npreaching Gentile liberty from interested motives; but that it must\nhave been some extraordinary occurrence, quite out of the common run\nof human influences and probabilities, that set him on his present\ncourse. What could have turned this furious Jewish persecutor all at\nonce into the champion of the cross? What indeed but the revelation\nof Christ which he received at the Damascus gate? His previous\ncareer up to that hour had been such as to make it impossible that\nhe should have received his gospel through human means. The chasm\nbetween his Christian and pre-Christian life had only been bridged by\na supernatural interposition of the mercy of Christ.\n\nOur modern critics, however, think that they know Paul better than\nhe knew himself. They hold that the problem raised by this passage\nis capable of a natural solution. Psychological analysis, we are\ntold, sets the matter in a different light. Saul of Tarsus had\na tender conscience. Underneath his fevered and ambitious zeal,\nthere lay in the young persecutor's heart a profound misgiving, a\nmortifying sense of his failure, and the failure of his people, to\nattain the righteousness of the Law. The seventh chapter of his\nEpistle to the Romans is a leaf taken out of the inner history of\nthis period of the Apostle's life. Through what a stern discipline\nthe Tarsian youth had passed in these legal years! How his haughty\nspirit chafed and tortured itself under the growing consciousness\nof its moral impotence! The Law had been truly his \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03cc\u03c2 (ch.\niii. 24), a severe tutor, preparing him unconsciously \"for Christ.\"\nIn this state of mind such scenes as the martyrdom of Stephen could\nnot but powerfully affect Saul, in spite of himself. The bearing of\nthe persecuted Nazarenes, the words of peace and forgiveness that\nthey uttered under their sufferings, stirred questionings in his\nbreast not always to be silenced. Self-distrust and remorse were\nsecretly undermining the rigour of his Judaic faith. They acted like\na \"goad\" (Acts xxvi. 14), against which he \"kicked in vain.\" He rode\nto Damascus--a long and lonely journey--in a state of increasing\ndisquiet and mental conflict. The heat and exhaustion of the desert\nmarch, acting on a nervous temperament naturally excitable and\noverwrought, hastened the crisis. Saul fell from his horse in an\naccess of fever, or catalepsy. His brain was on fire. The convictions\nthat haunted him suddenly took form and voice in the apparition of\nthe glorified Jesus, whom Stephen in his dying moments had addressed.\nFrom that figure seemed to proceed the reproachful cry which the\npersecutor's conscience had in vain been striving to make him hear.\nA flash of lightning, or, if you like, a sunstroke, is readily\nimagined to fire this train of circumstances,--and the explanation\nis complete! When, besides, M. Renan is good enough to tell us that\nhe has himself \"experienced an attack of this kind at Byblos,\" and\n\"with other principles would certainly have taken the hallucinations\nhe then had for visions,\"[22] what more can we desire? Nay, does not\nPaul himself admit, in ver. 16 of this chapter, that his conversion\nwas essentially a spiritual and subjective event?\n\n [22] _Les Ap\u00f4tres_, p. 180, note 1.\n\nSuch is the diagnosis of Paul's conversion offered us by rationalism;\nand it is not wanting in boldness nor in skill. But the corner-stone\non which it rests, the hinge of the whole theory, is imaginary and in\nfatal contradiction with the facts of the case. Paul himself _knows\nnothing_ of the remorse imputed to him previously to the vision of\nJesus. The historian of the Acts knows nothing of it. In a nature so\nupright and conscientious as that of Saul, this misgiving would at\nleast have induced him to desist from persecution. From first to last\nhis testimony is, \"I did it _ignorantly_, in unbelief.\" It was this\nignorance, this absence of any sense of wrong in the violence he\nused against the followers of Jesus, that, in his view, accounted for\nhis \"obtaining mercy\" (1 Tim. i. 13). If impressions of an opposite\nkind were previously struggling in his mind, with such force that on\na mere nervous shock they were ready to precipitate themselves in the\nshape of an over-mastering hallucination, changing instantly and for\never the current of his life, how comes it that the Apostle has told\nus nothing about them? That he should have _forgotten_ impressions\nso poignant and so powerful, is inconceivable. And if he has of set\npurpose ignored, nay, virtually denied this all-important fact, what\nbecomes of his sincerity?\n\nThe Apostle was manifestly innocent of any such predisposition\nto Christian faith as the above theory imputes to him. True, he\nwas conscious in those Judaistic days of his failure to attain\nrighteousness, of the disharmony existing between \"the law of his\nreason\" and that which wrought \"in his members.\" His conviction\nof sin supplied the moral precondition necessary in every case to\nsaving faith in Christ. But this negative condition does not help\nus in the least to explain the vision of the glorified Jesus. By no\npsychological process whatever could the experience of Rom. vii.\n7-24 be made to project itself in such an apparition. With all his\nmysticism and emotional susceptibility, Paul's mind was essentially\nsane and critical. To call him _epileptic_ is a calumny. No man so\ndiseased could have gone through the Apostle's labours, or written\nthese Epistles. His discussion of the subject of supernatural gifts,\nin 1 Cor. xii. and xiv., is a model of shrewdness and good sense.\nHe had experience of trances and ecstatic visions; and he knew,\nperhaps as well as M. Renan, how to distinguish them from objective\nrealities.[23] The manner in which he speaks of this appearance\nallows of no reasonable doubt as to the Apostle's full persuasion\nthat \"in sober certainty of waking sense\" he had seen Jesus our Lord.\n\n [23] 1 Cor. xiv. 18; 2 Cor. xii. 1-6; Acts xvi. 9; xviii. 8, 9;\n xxii. 17, 18.\n\nIt was this sensible and outward revelation that led to the inward\nrevelation of the Redeemer to his soul, of which Paul goes on to\nspeak in ver. 16. Without the latter the former would have been\npurposeless and useless. The objective vision could only have\nrevealed a \"Christ after the flesh,\" had it not been the means\nof opening Saul's closed heart to the influence of the Spirit of\nChrist. It was the means to this, and in the given circumstances the\nindispensable means.\n\nTo a history that \"knows no miracles,\" the Apostle Paul must remain\nan enigma. His faith in the crucified Jesus is equally baffling to\nnaturalism with that of the first disciples, who had laid Him in\nthe grave. When the Apostle argues that his antecedent relations\nto Christianity were such as to preclude his conversion having\ncome about by natural human means, we are bound to admit both the\nsincerity and the conclusiveness of his appeal.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n_PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION._\n\n \"But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me,\n _even_ from my mother's womb, and called me through His grace,\n to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the\n Gentiles; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:\n neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles\n before me: but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned\n unto Damascus.\"--GAL. i. 15-17.\n\n\n_It pleased God to reveal His Son in me_: this is after all the\nessential matter in Paul's conversion, as in that of every Christian.\nThe outward manifestation of Jesus Christ served in his case to\nbring about this result, and was necessary to qualify him for his\nextraordinary vocation. But of itself the supernatural vision had no\nredeeming virtue, and gave Saul of Tarsus no message of salvation\nfor the world. Its glory blinded and prostrated the persecutor; his\nheart might notwithstanding have remained rebellious and unchanged.\n\"I am Jesus,\" said the heavenly Form,--\"Go, and it shall be told thee\nwhat thou shalt do\";--that was all! And that was not salvation. \"Even\nthough one rose from the dead,\" still it is possible not to believe.\nAnd faith is possible in its highest degree, and is exercised to-day\nby multitudes, with no celestial light to illumine, no audible voice\nfrom beyond the grave to awaken. The sixteenth verse gives us the\ninward counterpart of that exterior revelation in which Paul's\nknowledge of Christ had its beginning,--but only its beginning.\n\nThe Apostle does not surely mean by \"in me,\" _in my case, through me\n(to others)_. This gives a sense true in itself, and expressed by\nPaul elsewhere (ver. 24; 1 Tim. i. 16), but unsuitable to the word\n\"reveal,\" and out of place at this point of the narrative. In the\nnext clause--\"that I might preach Him among the Gentiles\"--we learn\nwhat was to be the issue of this revelation for the world. But in\nthe first place it was a Divine certainty _within the breast of Paul\nhimself_. His Gentile Apostleship rested upon the most assured basis\nof inward conviction, upon a spiritual apprehension of the Redeemer's\nperson. He says, laying emphasis on the last two words, \"to reveal\nHis Son _within me_.\" So Chrysostom: Why did he not say _to me_,\nbut _in me_? Showing that not by words alone he learned the things\nconcerning faith; but that he was also filled with the abundance of\nthe Spirit, the revelation shining through his very soul; and that he\nhad Christ speaking in himself.\n\n\nI. _The substance of Paul's gospel was, therefore, given him by the\nunveiling of the Redeemer to his heart._\n\nThe \"revelation\" of ver. 16 takes up and completes that of ver. 12.\nThe dazzling appearance of Christ before his eyes and the summons of\nHis voice addressed to Saul's bodily ears formed the special mode in\nwhich it pleased God to \"call him by His grace.\" But \"whom He called,\nHe also justified.\" In this further act of grace salvation is first\npersonally realised, and the gospel becomes the man's individual\npossession. This experience ensued upon the acceptance of the fact\nthat the crucified Jesus was the Christ. But this was by no means\nall. As the revelation penetrated further into the Apostle's soul,\nhe began to apprehend its deeper significance. He knew already that\nthe Nazarene had claimed to be the Son of God, and on that ground\nhad been sentenced to death by the Sanhedrim. His resurrection,\nnow a demonstrated fact, showed that this awful claim, instead of\nbeing condemned, was acknowledged by God Himself. The celestial\nmajesty in which He appeared, the sublime authority with which He\nspoke, witnessed to His Divinity. To Paul equally with the first\nApostles, He \"was declared Son of God in power, by the resurrection\nof the dead.\" But this persuasion was borne in upon him in his after\nreflections, and could not be adequately realised in the first shock\nof his great discovery. The language of this verse throws no sort\nof suspicion on the reality of the vision before Damascus. Quite\nthe opposite. The inward presupposes the outward. Understanding\nfollows sight. The subjective illumination, the inward conviction of\nChrist's Divinity, in Paul's case as in that of the first disciples,\nwas brought about by the appearance of the risen, Divine Jesus.\nThat appearance furnishes in both instances the explanation of the\nastounding change that took place in the men. The heart full of\nblasphemy against His name has learnt to own Him as \"the Son of\nGod, who loved me and gave Himself for me.\" Through the bodily eyes\nof Saul of Tarsus the revelation of Jesus Christ had entered and\ntransformed his spirit.\n\nOf this interior revelation _the Holy Spirit_, according to the\nApostle's doctrine, had been the organ. The Lord on first meeting\nthe gathered Apostles after His resurrection \"breathed upon them,\nsaying, Receive ye the Holy Ghost\" (John xx. 22). This influence was\nin truth \"the power of His resurrection\"; it was the inspiring breath\nof the new life of humanity issuing from the open grave of Christ.\nThe baptism of Pentecost, with its \"mighty rushing wind,\" was but\nthe fuller effusion of the power whose earnest the Church received\nin that gentle breathing of peace on the day of the resurrection.\nBy His Spirit Christ made Himself a dwelling in the hearts of His\ndisciples, raised at last to a true apprehension of His nature.\nAll this was recapitulated in the experience of Paul. In his case\nthe common experience was the more sharply defined because of the\nsuddenness of his conversion, and the startling effect with which\nthis new consciousness projected itself upon the background of his\nearlier Pharisaic life. Paul had his Resurrection-vision on the road\nto Damascus. He received his Pentecostal baptism in the days that\nfollowed.\n\nIt is not necessary to fix the precise occasion of the second\nrevelation, or to connect it specifically with the visit of Ananias\nto Saul in Damascus, much less with his later \"ecstasy\" in the\ntemple (Acts ix. 10-19; xxii. 12-21). When Ananias, sent by Christ,\nbrought him the assurance of forgiveness from the injured Church,\nand bade him \"recover his sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost,\"\nthis message greatly comforted his heart, and pointed out to him\nmore clearly the way of salvation along which he was groping. But\nit is the office of the Spirit of God to reveal the Son of God; so\nPaul teaches everywhere in his Epistles, taught first by his own\nexperience. Not from Ananias, nor from any man had he received this\nknowledge; _God_ revealed His Son in the soul of the Apostle--\"sent\nforth the Spirit of His Son into his heart\" (ch. iv. 6). The language\nof 2 Cor. iii. 12-iv. 6 is the best commentary on this verse. A veil\nrested on the heart of Saul the Pharisee. He read the Old Covenant\nonly in the condemning letter. Not yet did he know \"the Lord\" who\nis \"the spirit.\" This veil was done away in Christ. \"The glory of\nthe Lord\" that burst upon him in his Damascus journey, rent it once\nand for ever from his eyes. God, the Light-giver, had \"shined in\nhis heart, in the face of Jesus Christ.\" Such was the further scope\nof the revelation which effected Paul's conversion. As he writes\nafterwards to Ephesus, \"the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father\nof glory, had given him a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the\nknowledge of Christ; eyes of the heart enlightened to know the hope\nof His calling, and His exceeding power to usward, according to that\nHe wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead, and set Him at\nHis own right hand\" (Eph. i. 17-21). In these words we hear an echo\nof the thoughts that passed through the Apostle's mind when first \"it\npleased God in him to reveal His Son.\"\n\n\nII. _In the light of this inner revelation Paul received his Gentile\nmission._\n\nHe speedily perceived that this was the purpose with which the\nrevelation was made: \"that I should preach Him among the Gentiles.\"\nThe three accounts of his conversion furnished by the Acts witness to\nthe same effect. Whether we should suppose that the Lord Jesus gave\nSaul this commission directly, at His first appearance, as seems to\nbe implied in Acts xxvi., or infer from the more detailed narrative\nof chapters ix. and xxii., that the announcement was sent by Ananias\nand afterwards more urgently repeated in the vision at the Temple, in\neither case the fact remains the same; from the beginning Paul knew\nthat he was appointed to be Christ's witness to the Gentiles. This\ndestination was included in the Divine call which brought him to\nfaith in Jesus. His Judaic prejudices were swept away. He was ready\nto embrace the universalism of the Gospel. With his fine logical\ninstinct, sharpened by hatred, he had while yet a Pharisee discerned\nmore clearly than many Jewish Christians the bearing of the doctrine\nof the cross upon the legal system. He saw that the struggle was one\nof life and death. The vehemence with which he flung himself into the\ncontest was due to this perception. But it followed from this, that,\nonce convinced of the Messiahship of Jesus, Paul's faith at a bound\noverleaped all Jewish barriers. \"Judaism--or the religion of the\nCrucified,\" was the alternative with which his stern logic pursued\nthe Nazarenes. Judaism _and_ Christianity--this was a compromise\nintolerable to his nature. Before Saul's conversion he had left that\nhalting-place behind; he apprehended already, in some sense, the\ntruth up to which the elder Apostles had to be educated, that \"in\nChrist Jesus there is neither Greek nor Jew.\" He passed at a step\nfrom the one camp to the other. In this there was consistency. The\nenlightened, conscientious persecutor, who had debated with Stephen\nand helped to stone him, was sure, if he became a Christian, to\nbecome a Christian of Stephen's school. When he entered the Church,\nPaul left the Synagogue. He was ripe for his world-wide commission.\nThere was no surprise, no unpreparedness in his mind when the\ncharge was given him, \"Go; for I will send thee far hence among the\nGentiles.\"\n\nIn the Apostle's view, his personal salvation and that of the race\nwere objects united from the first. Not as a privileged Jew, but as\na sinful man, the Divine grace had found him out. The righteousness\nof God was revealed to him on terms which brought it within the\nreach of every human being. The Son of God whom he now beheld was a\npersonage vastly greater than his national Messiah, the \"Christ after\nthe flesh\" of his Jewish dreams, and His gospel was correspondingly\nloftier and larger in its scope. \"God was in Christ, reconciling,\"\nnot a nation, but \"_a world_ unto Himself.\" The \"grace\" conferred\non him was given that he might \"preach among the Gentiles Christ's\nunsearchable riches, and make all men see the mystery\" of the counsel\nof redeeming love (Eph. iii. 1-11). It was the world's redemption of\nwhich Paul partook; and it was his business to let the world know it.\nHe had fathomed the depths of sin and self-despair; he had tasted the\nuttermost of pardoning grace. God and the world met in his single\nsoul, and were reconciled. He felt from the first what he expresses\nin his latest Epistles, that \"the grace of God which appeared\" to\nhim, was \"for the salvation of all men\" (Tit. ii. 11). \"Faithful is\nthe saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came\ninto the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief\" (1 Tim. i. 15).\nThe same revelation that made Paul a Christian, made him the Apostle\nof mankind.\n\nIII. _For this vocation the Apostle had been destined by God from the\nbeginning._ \"It pleased God to do this,\" he says, \"who had marked me\nout from my mother's womb, and called me by His grace.\"\n\nWhile \"Saul was yet breathing out threatening and slaughter\" against\nthe disciples of Jesus, how different a future was being prepared\nfor him! How little can we forecast the issue of our own plans,\nor of those we form for others. His Hebrew birth, his rabbinical\nproficiency, the thoroughness with which he had mastered the tenets\nof Legalism, had fitted him like no other to be the bearer of the\nGospel to the Gentiles. This Epistle proves the fact. Only a graduate\nof the best Jewish schools could have written it. Paul's master,\nGamaliel, if he had read the letter, must perforce have been proud\nof his scholar; he would have feared more than ever that those who\nopposed the Nazarene might \"haply be found fighting against God.\" The\nApostle foils the Judaists with their own weapons. He knows every\ninch of the ground on which the battle is waged. At the same time, he\nwas a born Hellenist and a citizen of the Empire, native \"of no mean\ncity.\" Tarsus, his birthplace, was the capital of an important Roman\nprovince, and a centre of Greek culture and refinement. In spite of\nthe Hebraic conservatism of Saul's family, the genial atmosphere\nof such a town could not but affect the early development of so\nsensitive a nature. He had sufficient tincture of Greek letters and\nconversance with Roman law to make him a true cosmopolitan, qualified\nto be \"all things to all men.\" He presents an admirable example of\nthat versatility and suppleness of genius which have distinguished\nfor so many ages the sons of Jacob, and enable them to find a home\nand a market for their talents in every quarter of the world. Paul\nwas \"a chosen vessel, to bear the name of Jesus before Gentiles and\nkings, and the sons of Israel.\"\n\nBut his mission was concealed till the appointed hour. Thinking\nof his personal election, he reminds himself of the words spoken\nto Jeremiah touching his prophetic call. \"Before I formed thee in\nthe belly I knew thee; and before thou camest out of the womb I\nsanctified thee. I appointed thee a prophet unto the nations\" (Jer.\ni. 5). Or like the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah he might say, \"The\nLord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath\nHe made mention of my name. And He hath made my mouth like a sharp\nsword, in the shadow of His hand hath He hid me; and He hath made me\na polished shaft, in His quiver hath He kept me close\" (Isa. xlix. 1,\n2). This belief in a fore-ordaining Providence, preparing in secret\nits chosen instruments, so deeply rooted in the Old Testament faith,\nwas not wanting to Paul. His career is a signal illustration of its\ntruth. He applies it, in his doctrine of Election, to the history of\nevery child of grace. \"Whom He foreknew, He did predestinate. Whom\nHe did predestinate, He called.\" Once more we see how the Apostle's\ntheology was moulded by his experience.\n\nThe manner in which Saul of Tarsus had been prepared all his life\nlong for the service of Christ, magnified to his eyes the sovereign\ngrace of God. \"He called me _through His grace_.\" The call came at\nprecisely the fit time; it came at a time and in a manner calculated\nto display the Divine compassion in the highest possible degree. This\nlesson Paul could never forget. To the last he dwells upon it with\ndeep emotion. \"In me,\" he writes to Timothy, \"Jesus Christ first\nshowed forth all His longsuffering. I was a blasphemer, a persecutor,\ninsolent and injurious; but I obtained mercy\" (1 Tim. i. 13-16).\nHe was so dealt with from the beginning, he had been called to the\nknowledge of Christ under such circumstances that he felt he had\na right to say, above other men, \"By the grace of God I am what I\nam.\" The predestination under which his life was conducted \"from his\nmother's womb,\" had for its chief purpose, to exhibit God's mercy\nto mankind, \"that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding\nriches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus\" (Eph. ii.\n7). To this purpose, so soon as he discerned it, he humbly yielded\nhimself. The Son of God, whose followers he had hunted to death, whom\nin his madness he would have crucified afresh, had appeared to him\nto save and to forgive. The _grace_ of it, the infinite kindness and\ncompassion such an act revealed in the Divine nature, excited new\nwonder in the Apostle's soul till his latest hour. Henceforth he was\nthe bondman of grace, the celebrant of grace. His life was one act of\nthanksgiving \"to the praise of the glory of His grace!\"\n\nIV. From Jesus Christ in person Paul had received his knowledge of\nthe Gospel, without human intervention. In the revelation of Christ\nto his soul he possessed the substance of the truth he was afterwards\nto teach; and with the revelation there came the commission to\nproclaim it to all men. His gospel-message was in its essence\ncomplete; the Apostleship was already his. Such are the assertions\nthe Apostle makes in reply to his gainsayers. And he goes on to\nshow that _the course he took after his conversion sustains these\nlofty claims_: \"When God had been pleased to reveal His Son in me,\nimmediately (right from the first) I took no counsel with flesh and\nblood. I avoided repairing to Jerusalem, to the elder Apostles; I\nwent away into Arabia, and back again to Damascus. It was three years\nbefore I set foot in Jerusalem.\"\n\nIf that were so, how could Paul have received his doctrine or his\ncommission from the Church of Jerusalem, as his traducers alleged?\nHe acted from the outset under the sense of a unique Divine call,\nthat allowed of no human validation or supplement. Had the case been\notherwise, had Paul come to his knowledge of Christ by ordinary\nchannels, his first impulse would have been to go up to the mother\ncity to report himself there, and to gain further instruction. Above\nall, if he intended to be a minister of Christ, it would have been\nproper to secure the approval of the Twelve, and to be accredited\nfrom Jerusalem. This was the course which \"flesh and blood\" dictated,\nwhich Saul's new friends at Damascus probably urged upon him. It\nwas insinuated that he had actually proceeded in this way, and put\nhimself under the direction of Peter and the Judean Church. But he\nsays, \"I did nothing of the sort. I kept clear of Jerusalem for\nthree years; and then I only went there to make private acquaintance\nwith Peter, and stayed in the city but a fortnight.\" Although Paul\ndid not for many years make public claim to rank with the Twelve,\nfrom the commencement he acted in conscious independence of them.\nHe calls them \"Apostles _before me_,\" by this phrase assuming the\nmatter in dispute. He tacitly asserts his equality in official status\nwith the Apostles of Jesus, assigning to the others precedence only\nin point of time. And he speaks of this equality in terms implying\nthat it was already present to his mind at this former period. Under\nthis conviction he held aloof from human guidance and approbation.\nInstead of \"going up to Jerusalem,\" the centre of publicity, the\nhead-quarters of the rising Church, Paul \"went off into Arabia.\"\n\nThere were, no doubt, other reasons for this step. Why did he choose\n_Arabia_ for his sojourn? and what, pray, was he doing there? The\nApostle leaves us to our own conjectures. _Solitude_, we imagine,\nwas his principal object. His Arabian retreat reminds us of the\nArabian exile of Moses, of the wilderness discipline of John the\nBaptist, and the \"forty days\" of Jesus in the wilderness. In each\nof these instances, the desert retirement followed upon a great\ninward crisis, and was preparatory to the entrance of the Lord's\nservant on his mission to the world. Elijah, at a later period of his\ncourse, sought the wilderness under motives not dissimilar. After\nsuch a convulsion as Paul had passed through, with a whole world of\nnew ideas and emotions pouring in upon him, he felt that he must be\nalone; he must get away from the voices of men. There are such times\nin the history of every earnest soul. In the silence of the Arabian\ndesert, wandering amid the grandest scenes of ancient revelation,\nand communing in stillness with God and with his own heart, the\nyoung Apostle will think out the questions that press upon him; he\nwill be able to take a calmer survey of the new world into which he\nhas been ushered, and will learn to see clearly and walk steadily\nin the heavenly light that at first bewildered him. So \"the Spirit\nimmediately driveth him out into the wilderness.\" In Arabia one\nconfers, not with flesh and blood, but with the mountains and with\nGod. From Arabia Saul returned in possession of himself, and of his\ngospel.\n\nThe Acts of the Apostles omits this Arabian episode (Acts ix. 19-25).\nBut for what Paul tells us here, we should have gathered that he\nbegan at once after his baptism to preach Christ in Damascus, his\npreaching after no long time[24] exciting Jewish enmity to such\na pitch that his life was imperilled, and the Christian brethren\ncompelled him to seek safety by flight to Jerusalem. The reader of\nLuke is certainly surprised to find a period of three years,[25]\nwith a prolonged residence in Arabia, interpolated between Paul's\nconversion and his reception in Jerusalem. Luke's silence, we judge,\nis _intentional_. The Arabian retreat formed no part of the Apostle's\npublic life, and had no place in the narrative of the Acts. Paul only\nmentions it here in the briefest terms, and because the reference was\nnecessary to put his relations to the first Apostles in their proper\nlight. For the time the converted Saul had dropped out of sight; and\nthe historian of the Acts respects his privacy.\n\n [24]\u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03af, _a considerable time_. The expression is\n indefinite.\n\n [25] Ver. 18: that is, parts of \"three years,\" according to\n ancient reckoning--say from 36 to 38 A.D., possibly less than two\n in actual duration.\n\nThe place of the Arabian journey seems to us to lie between vv.\n21 and 22 of Acts ix. That passage gives a twofold description of\nPaul's preaching in Damascus, in its earlier and later stages, with a\ndouble note of time (vv. 19 and 23). Saul's first testimony, taking\nplace \"straightway,\" was, one would presume, a mere declaration of\nfaith in Jesus: \"In the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, (saying)\nthat He is the Son of God\" (R.V.), language in striking harmony\nwith that of the Apostle in the text (vv. 12, 16). Naturally this\nrecantation caused extreme astonishment in Damascus, where Saul's\nreputation was well-known both to Jews and Christians, and his\narrival was expected in the character of Jewish inquisitor-in-chief.\nVer. 22 presents a different situation. Paul is now preaching in\nhis established and characteristic style; as we read it, we might\nfancy we hear him debating in the synagogues of Pisidian Antioch or\nCorinth or Thessalonica: \"He was confounding the Jews, _proving_ that\nthis is the Christ.\" Neither Saul himself nor his Jewish hearers in\nthe first days after his conversion would be in the mood for the\nsustained argumentation and Scriptural dialectic thus described.\nThe explanation of the change lies behind the opening words of the\nverse: \"But Saul increased in strength\"--a growth due not only to\nthe prolonged opposition he had to encounter, but still more, as\nwe conjecture from this hint of the Apostle, to the period of rest\nand reflection which he enjoyed in his Arabian seclusion. The two\nmarks of time given us in vv. 19 and 23 of Luke's narrative, may be\nfairly distinguished from each other--\"certain days,\" and \"sufficient\ndays\" (or \"a considerable time\")--as denoting a briefer and a longer\nseason respectively: the former so short that the excitement caused\nby Saul's declaration of his new faith had not yet subsided when he\nwithdrew from the city into the desert--in which case Luke's note\nof time does not really conflict with Paul's \"immediately\"; the\nlatter affording a lapse of time sufficient for Saul to develope\nhis argument for the Messiahship of Jesus, and to provoke the Jews,\nworsted in logic, to resort to other weapons. From Luke's point of\nview the sojourn in Arabia, however extended, was simply an incident,\nof no public importance, in Paul's early ministry in Damascus.\n\nThe disappearance of Saul during this interval helps however, as we\nthink, to explain a subsequent statement in Luke's narrative that is\ncertainly perplexing (Acts ix. 26, 27). When Saul, after his escape\nfrom Damascus, \"was come to Jerusalem,\" and \"essayed to join himself\nto the disciples,\" they, we are told, \"were all afraid of him, not\nbelieving that he was a disciple!\" For while the Church at Jerusalem\nhad doubtless heard at the time of Saul's marvellous conversion three\nyears before, his long retirement and avoidance of Jerusalem threw an\nair of mystery and suspicion about his proceedings, and revived the\nfears of the Judean brethren; and his reappearance created a panic.\nIn consequence of his sudden departure from Damascus, it is likely\nthat no public report had as yet reached Jud\u00e6a of Saul's return to\nthat city and his renewed ministry there. Barnabas now came forward\nto act as sponsor for the suspected convert. What induced him to do\nthis--whether it was that his largeness of heart enabled him to read\nSaul's character better than others, or whether he had some earlier\nprivate acquaintance with the Tarsian--we cannot tell. The account\nthat Barnabas was able to give of his friend's conversion and of his\nbold confession in Damascus, won for Paul the place in the confidence\nof Peter and the leaders of the Church at Jerusalem which he never\nafterwards lost.\n\nThe two narratives--the history of Luke and the letter of\nPaul--relate the same series of events, but from almost opposite\nstandpoints. Luke dwells upon _Paul's connection with the Church at\nJerusalem and its Apostles_. Paul is maintaining _his independence of\nthem_. There is no contradiction; but there is just such discrepancy\nas will arise where two honest and competent witnesses are relating\nidentical facts in a different connection.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n_PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH._\n\n \"Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas,\n and tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles\n saw I none, but only James the Lord's brother. Now touching\n the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie\n not. Then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia And I\n was still unknown by face unto the churches of Jud\u00e6a which were\n in Christ: but they only heard say, He that once persecuted us\n now preacheth the faith of which he once made havock; and they\n glorified God in me.\"--GAL. i. 18-24.\n\n\nFor the first two years of his Christian life, Paul held no\nintercourse whatever with the Church at Jerusalem and its chiefs. His\nrelation with them was commenced by the visit he paid to Peter in the\nthird year after his conversion. And that relation was more precisely\ndetermined and made public when, after successfully prosecuting for\nfourteen years his mission to the heathen, the Apostle again went up\nto Jerusalem to defend the liberty of the Gentile Church (ch. ii.\n1-10).\n\nA clear understanding of this course of events was essential to the\nvindication of Paul's position in the eyes of the Galatians. The\n\"troublers\" told them that Paul's doctrine was not that of the mother\nChurch; that his knowledge of the gospel and authority to preach it\ncame from the elder Apostles, with whom since his attack upon Peter\nat Antioch he was at open variance. They themselves had come down\nfrom Jud\u00e6a on purpose to set his pretensions in their true light,\nand to teach the Gentiles the way of the Lord more perfectly.\n\nModern rationalism has espoused the cause of these \"deceitful\nworkers\" (2 Cor. xi. 13-15). It endeavours to rehabilitate the\nJudaistic party. The \"critical\" school maintain that the opposition\nof the Circumcisionists to the Apostle Paul was perfectly legitimate.\nThey hold that the \"pseud-apostles\" of Corinth, the \"certain from\nJames,\" the \"troublers\" and \"false brethren privily brought in\" of\nthis Epistle, did in truth represent, as they claimed to do, the\nprinciples of the Jewish Christian Church; and that there was a\nradical divergence between the Pauline and Petrine gospels, of which\nthe two Apostles were fully aware from the time of their encounter\nat Antioch. However Paul may have wished to disguise the fact to\nhimself, the teaching of the Twelve was identical, we are told,\nwith that \"other gospel\" on which he pronounces his anathema; the\noriginal Church of Jesus never emancipated itself from the trammels\nof legalism; the Apostle Paul, and not his Master, was in reality\nthe author of evangelical doctrine, the founder of the catholic\nChurch. The conflict between Peter and Paul at Antioch, related in\nthis Epistle, supplies, in the view of Baur and his followers, the\nkey to the history of the Early Church. The Ebionite assumption of a\npersonal rivalry between the two Apostles and an intrinsic opposition\nin their doctrine, hitherto regarded as the invention of a desperate\nand decaying heretical sect, these ingenious critics have adopted for\nthe basis of their \"scientific\" reconstruction of the New Testament.\nPaul's Judaizing hinderers and troublers are to be canonized; and\nthe pseudo-Clementine writings, forsooth, must take the place of the\ndiscredited Acts of the Apostles. Verily \"the whirligig of time hath\nits revenges.\" To empanel Paul on his accusers' side, and to make\nthis Epistle above all convict him of heterodoxy, is an attempt which\ndazzles by its very daring.\n\nLet us endeavour to form a clear conception of the facts touching\nPaul's connection with the first Apostles and his attitude and\nfeeling towards the Jewish Church, as they are in evidence in the\nfirst two chapters of this Epistle.\n\nI. On the one hand, it is clear that the Gentile Apostle's relations\nto Peter and the Twelve were those of _personal independence and\nofficial equality_.\n\nThis is the aspect of the case on which Paul lays stress. His\nsceptical critics argue that under his assertion of independence\nthere is concealed an opposition of principle, a \"radical\ndivergence.\" The sense of independence is unmistakable. It is on\nthat side that the Apostle seeks to guard himself. With this aim\nhe styles himself at the outset \"an Apostle not from men, nor by\nman\"--neither man-made nor man-sent. Such apostles there were; and\nin this character, we imagine, the Galatian Judaistic teachers, like\nthose of Corinth,[26] professed to appear, as the emissaries of the\nChurch in Jerusalem and the authorised exponents of the teaching of\nthe \"pillars\" there. Paul is an Apostle at first-hand, taking his\ncommission directly from Jesus Christ. In that quality he pronounces\nhis benediction and his anathema. To support this assumption he\nhas shown how impossible it was in point of time and circumstances\nthat he should have been beholden for his gospel to the Jerusalem\nChurch and the elder Apostles. So far as regarded the manner of his\nconversion and the events of the first decisive years in which his\nChristian principles and vocation took their shape, his position had\nbeen altogether detached and singular; the Jewish Apostles could in\nno way claim him for their son in the gospel.\n\n [26] 2 Cor. xi. 13; iii. 1-3. See the remarks on the word\n _Apostle_ in Chapter I. p. 12.\n\nBut at last, \"after three years,\" Saul \"did go up to Jerusalem.\" What\nwas it for? To report himself to the authorities of the Church and\nplace himself under their direction? To seek Peter's instruction,\nin order to obtain a more assured knowledge of the gospel he had\nembraced? Nothing of the kind. Not even \"_to question_ Cephas,\"\nas some render \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, following an older classical usage--\"to\ngain information\" from him; but \"I went up _to make acquaintance\nwith_ Cephas.\" Saul went to Jerusalem carrying in his heart the\nconsciousness of his high vocation, seeking, as an equal with an\nequal, to make personal acquaintance with the leader of the Twelve.\n_Cephas_ (as he was called at Jerusalem) must have been at this time\nto Paul a profoundly interesting personality. He was the one man\nabove all others whom the Apostle felt he must get to know, with whom\nit was necessary for him to have a thorough understanding.\n\nHow momentous was this meeting! How much we could wish to know what\npassed between these two in the conversations of the fortnight\nthey spent together. One can imagine the delight with which Peter\nwould relate to his listener the scenes of the life of Jesus; how\nthe two men would weep together at the recital of the Passion, the\nbetrayal, trial and denial, the agony of the Garden, the horror of\nthe cross; with what mingled awe and triumph he would describe the\nevents of the Resurrection and the Forty Days, the Ascension, and the\nbaptism of fire. In Paul's account of the appearances of the risen\nChrist (1 Cor. xv. 4-8), written many years afterwards, there are\nstatements most naturally explained as a recollection of what he had\nheard privately from Peter, and possibly also from James, at this\nconference. For it is in his gospel message and doctrine, and his\nApostolic commission, not in regard to the details of the biography\nof Jesus, that Paul claims to be independent of tradition. And with\nwhat deep emotion would Peter receive in turn from Paul's lips the\naccount of his meeting with Jesus, of the three dark days that\nfollowed, of the message sent through Ananias, and the revelations\nmade and purposes formed during the Arabian exile. Between two such\nmen, met at such a time, there would surely be an entire frankness\nof communication and a brotherly exchange of convictions and of\nplans. In that case Paul could not fail to inform the elder Apostle\nof the extent of the commission he had received from their common\nMaster; although he does not appear to have made any public and\nformal assertion of his Apostolic dignity for a considerable time\nafterwards. The supposition of a private cognizance on Peter's part\nof Paul's true status makes the open recognition which took place\nfourteen years later easy to understand (ch. ii. 6-10).\n\n\"But other of the Apostles,\" Paul goes on to say, \"saw I none, but\nonly James the brother of the Lord.\" James, _no Apostle_ surely;\nneither in the higher sense, for he cannot be reasonably identified\nwith \"James the son of Alph\u00e6us;\" nor in the lower, for he was, as\nfar as we can learn, stationary at Jerusalem. But he stood so near\nthe Apostles, and was in every way so important a person, that if\nPaul had omitted the name of James in this connection, he would have\nseemed to pass over a material fact. The reference to James in 1\nCor. xv. 7--a hint deeply interesting in itself, and lending so much\ndignity to the position of James--suggests that Paul had been at this\ntime in confidential intercourse with James as well as Peter, each\nrelating to the other how he had \"seen the Lord.\"\n\nSo cardinal are the facts just stated (vv. 15-19), as bearing on\nPaul's apostleship, and so contrary to the representations made by\nthe Judaizers, that he pauses to call God to witness his veracity:\n\"Now in what I am writing to you, lo, before God, I lie not.\" The\nApostle never makes this appeal lightly; but only in support of some\naverment in which his personal honour and his strongest feelings are\ninvolved.[27] It was alleged, with some show of proof, that Paul was\nan underling of the authorities of the Church at Jerusalem, and that\nall he knew of the gospel had been learned from the Twelve. From ver.\n11 onwards he has been making a circumstantial contradiction of these\nassertions. He protests that up to the time when he commenced his\nGentile mission, he had been under no man's tutelage or tuition in\nrespect to his knowledge of the gospel. He can say no more to prove\nhis case. Either his opposers or himself are uttering falsehood. The\nGalatians know, or ought to know, how incapable he is of such deceit.\nSolemnly therefore he avouches, closing the matter so far, as if\ndrawing himself up to his utmost height: \"Behold, before God, I do\nnot lie!\"\n\n [27] See Rom. ix. 1; 2 Cor. i. 17, 18, 23; 1 Thess. ii. 5.\n\nBut now we are confronted with the narrative of the Acts (chap.\nix. 26-30), which renders a very different account of this passage\nin the Apostle's life. (To vv. 26, 27 of Luke's narrative we have\nalready alluded in the concluding paragraphs of Chapter V). We are\ntold there that Barnabas introduced Saul \"to the Apostles\"; here,\nthat he saw none of them but Cephas, and only James besides. The\n_number_ of the Apostolate present in Jerusalem at the time is a\nparticular that does not engage Luke's mind; while it is of the\nessence of Paul's affirmation. What the Acts relates is that Saul,\nthrough Barnabas' intervention, was now received by the Apostolic\nfellowship as a Christian brother, and as one who \"had seen the\nLord.\" The object which Saul had in coming to Jerusalem, and the fact\nthat just then Cephas was the only one of the Twelve to be found\nin the city, along with James--these are matters which only come\ninto view from the private and personal standpoint to which Paul\nadmits us. For the rest, there is certainly no contradiction when\nwe read in the one report that Paul \"went up to make acquaintance\nwith Cephas,\" and in the other, that he \"was with them going in and\nout at Jerusalem, preaching boldly in the name of the Lord;\" that\n\"he spake and disputed against the Hellenists,\" moving their anger\nso violently that his life was again in danger, and he had to be\ncarried down to C\u00e6sarea and shipped off to Tarsus. Saul was not the\nman to hide his head in Jerusalem. We can understand how greatly his\nspirit was stirred by his arrival there, and by the recollection of\nhis last passage through the city gates. In these very synagogues of\nthe Hellenists he had himself confronted Stephen; outside those walls\nhe had assisted to stone the martyr. Paul's address delivered many\nyears later to the Jewish mob that attempted his life in Jerusalem,\nshows how deeply these remembrances troubled his soul (Acts xxii.\n17-22). And they would not suffer him now to be silent. He hoped\nthat his testimony to Christ, delivered in the spot where he had\nbeen so notorious as a persecutor, would produce a softening effect\non his old companions. It was sure to affect them powerfully, one\nway or the other. As the event proved, it did not take many words\nfrom Saul's lips to awaken against him the same fury that hurried\nStephen to his death. A fortnight was time quite sufficient, under\nthe circumstances, to make Jerusalem, as we say, too hot to hold\nSaul. Nor can we wonder, knowing his love for his kindred, that there\nneeded a special command from heaven (Acts xxii. 21), joined to the\nfriendly compulsion of the Church, to induce him to yield ground\nand quit the city. But he had accomplished something; he had \"made\nacquaintance with Cephas.\"\n\nThis brief visit to the Holy City was a second crisis in Paul's\ncareer. He was now thrust forth upon his mission to the heathen. It\nwas evident that he was not to look for success among his Jewish\nbrethren. He lost no opportunity of appealing to them; but it\nwas commonly with the same result as at Damascus and Jerusalem.\nThroughout life he carried with him this \"great sorrow and unceasing\npain of heart,\" that to his \"kinsmen according to the flesh,\" for\nwhose salvation he could consent to forfeit his own, his gospel\nwas hid. In their eyes he was a traitor to Israel, and must count\nupon their enmity. Everything conspired to point in one direction:\n\"Depart,\" the Divine voice had said, \"for I will send thee far hence\nunto the Gentiles.\" And Paul obeyed. \"I went,\" he relates here, \"into\nthe regions of Syria and Cilicia\" (ver. 21).\n\nTo Tarsus, the Cilician capital, Saul voyaged from Jud\u00e6a. So we\nlearn from Acts ix. 30. His native place had the first claim on the\nApostle after Jerusalem, and afforded the best starting-point for\nhis independent mission. Syria, however, precedes Cilicia in the\ntext; it was the leading province of these two, in which Paul was\noccupied during the fourteen years ensuing, and became the seat of\ndistinguished Churches. In Antioch, the Syrian capital, Christianity\nwas already planted (Acts xi. 19--21). The close connection of\nthe Churches of these provinces, and their predominantly Gentile\ncharacter, are both evident from the letter addressed to them\nsubsequently by the Council of Jerusalem (Acts xv. 23, 24). Acts xv.\n41 shows that a number of Christian societies owning Paul's authority\nwere found at a later time in this region. And there was a highroad\ndirect from Syro-Cilicia to Galatia, which Paul traversed in his\nsecond visit to the latter country (Acts xviii. 22, 23); so that the\nGalatians would doubtless be aware of the existence of these older\nGentile Churches, and of their relation to Paul. He has no need to\ndwell on this first chapter of his missionary history. After but a\nfortnight's visit to Jerusalem, Paul went into these Gentile regions,\nand there for twice seven years--with what success was known to\nall--\"preached the faith of which once he made havoc.\"\n\nThis period was divided into two parts. For five or six years the\nApostle laboured alone; afterwards in conjunction with Barnabas,\nwho invited his help at Antioch (Acts xi. 25, 26). Barnabas was\nPaul's senior, and had for some time held the leading position in\nthe Church of Antioch; and Paul was personally indebted to this\ngenerous man (p. 82). He accepted the position of helper to Barnabas\nwithout any compromise of his higher authority, as yet held in\nreserve. He accompanied Barnabas to Jerusalem in 44 (or 45) A.D.,\nwith the contribution made by the Syrian Church for the relief of the\nfamine-stricken Judean brethren--a visit which Paul seems here to\nforget.[28] But the Church at Jerusalem was at that time undergoing a\nsevere persecution; its leaders were either in prison or in flight.\nThe two delegates can have done little more than convey the moneys\nentrusted to them, and that with the utmost secrecy. Possibly Paul on\nthis occasion never set foot inside the city. In any case, the event\nhad no bearing on the Apostle's present contention.\n\n [28] Acts xi. 27-30. It is significant that this ministration was\n sent \"to the Elders.\"\n\nBetween this journey and the really important visit to Jerusalem\nintroduced in chap. ii. 1, Barnabas and Paul undertook, at the\nprompting of the Holy Spirit expressed through the Church of\nAntioch (Acts xiii. 1-4), the missionary expedition described in\nActs xiii., xiv. Under the trials of this journey the ascendancy\nof the younger evangelist became patent to all. Paul was marked\nout in the eyes of the Gentiles as their born leader, the Apostle\nof heathen Christianity. He appears to have taken the chief part\nin the discussion with the Judaists respecting circumcision, which\nimmediately ensued at Antioch; and was put at the head of the\ndeputation sent up to Jerusalem concerning this question. This was a\nturning-point in the Apostle's history. It brought about the public\nrecognition of his leadership in the Church. The seal of man was now\nto be set upon the secret election of God.\n\nDuring this long period, the Apostle tells us, he \"remained unknown\nby face to the Churches of Jud\u00e6a.\" Absent for so many years\nfrom the metropolis, after a fortnight's flying visit, spent in\nprivate intercourse with Peter and James, and in controversy in the\nHellenistic synagogues where few Christians of the city would be\nlikely to follow him,[29] Paul was a stranger to the bulk of the\nJudean disciples. But they watched his course, notwithstanding,\nwith lively interest and with devout thanksgiving to God (vv. 22,\n23). Throughout this first period of his ministry the Apostle acted\nin complete independence of the Jewish Church, making no report to\nits chiefs, nor seeking any direction from them. Accordingly, when\nafterwards he did go up to Jerusalem and laid before the authorities\nthere his gospel to the heathen, they had nothing to add to it; they\ndid not take upon themselves to give him any advice or injunction,\nbeyond the wish that he and Barnabas should \"remember the poor,\" as\nhe was already forward to do (ch. ii. 1-10). Indeed the three famous\nPillars of the Jewish Church at this time openly acknowledged Paul's\nequality with Peter in the Apostleship, and resigned to his direction\nthe Gentile province. Finally at Antioch, the head-quarters of\nGentile Christianity, when Peter compromised the truth of the gospel\nby yielding to Judaistic pressure, Paul had not hesitated publicly\nto reprove him (ch. ii. 11-21). He had been compelled in this way to\ncarry the vindication of his gospel to the furthest lengths; and he\nhad done this successfully. It is only when we reach the end of the\nsecond chapter that we discover how much the Apostle meant when he\nsaid, \"My gospel is not according to man.\"\n\n [29] For the ministry alluded to in Acts xxvi. 20 there were\n other, later opportunities, especially in the journey described\n in Acts xv. 3; see also Acts xxi. 15, 16.\n\nIf there was any man to whom as a Christian teacher he was bound to\ndefer, any one who might be regarded as his official superior, it was\nthe Apostle Peter. Yet against this very Cephas he had dared openly\nto measure himself. Had he been a disciple of the Jewish Apostle, a\nservant of the Jerusalem Church, how would this have been possible?\nHad he not possessed an authority derived immediately from Christ,\nhow could he have stood out alone, against the prerogative of Peter,\nagainst the personal friendship and local influence of Barnabas,\nagainst the example of all his Jewish brethren? Nay, he was prepared\nto rebuke all the Apostles, and anathematize all the angels, rather\nthan see Christ's gospel set at nought. For it was in his view \"the\ngospel of the glory of the blessed God, _committed to my trust_!\" (1\nTim. i. 11).\n\nII. But while Paul stoutly maintains his independence, he does this\nin such a way as to show that there was no hostility or personal\nrivalry between himself and the first Apostles. His relations to the\nJewish Church were all the while those of _friendly acquaintance and\nbrotherly recognition_.\n\nThat Nazarene sect which he had of old time persecuted, was \"the\nChurch of God\" (ver. 13). To the end of his life this thought gave\na poignancy to the Apostle's recollection of his early days. To\n\"the Churches of Jud\u00e6a\"[30] he attaches the epithet _in Christ_,\na phrase of peculiar depth of meaning with Paul, which he could\nnever have conferred as matter of formal courtesy, nor by way of\nmere distinction between the Church and the Synagogue. From Paul's\nlips this title is a guarantee of orthodoxy. It satisfies us that\nthe \"other gospel\" of the Circumcisionists was very far from being\nthe gospel of the Jewish Christian Church at large. Paul is careful\nto record the sympathy which the Judean brethren cherished for his\nmissionary work in its earliest stages, although their knowledge of\nhim was comparatively distant: \"Only they continued to hear that\nour old persecutor is preaching the faith which once he sought\nto destroy. And in me they glorified God.\" Nor does he drop the\nsmallest hint to show that the disposition of the Churches in the\nmother country toward himself, or his judgement respecting them, had\nundergone any change up to the time of his writing this Epistle.\n\n [30] Ver. 22. It is arbitrary in Meyer to exclude from this\n category the Church of Jerusalem.\n\nHe speaks of the elder Apostles in terms of unfeigned respect. In\nhis reference in ch. ii. 11-21 to the error of Peter, there is great\nplainness of speech, but no bitterness. When the Apostle says that\nhe \"went up to Jerusalem to see Peter,\" and describes James as \"the\nLord's brother,\" and when he refers to both of them, along with\nJohn, as \"those accounted to be pillars,\" can he mean anything but\nhonour to these honoured men? To read into these expressions a covert\njealousy and to suppose them written by way of disparagement, seems\nto us a strangely jaundiced and small-minded sort of criticism. The\nApostle testifies that Peter held a Divine trust in the Gospel,\nand that God had \"wrought for Peter\" to this effect, as for\nhimself. By claiming the testimony of the Pillars at Jerusalem to\nhis vocation, he shows his profound respect for theirs. When the\nunfortunate difference arose between Peter and himself at Antioch,\nPaul is careful to show that the Jewish Apostle on that occasion was\ninfluenced by the circumstances of the moment, and nevertheless\nremained true in his real convictions to the common gospel.\n\nIn view of these facts, it is impossible to believe, as the\n_Tendency_ critics would have us do, that Paul when he wrote this\nletter was at feud with the Jewish Church. In that case, while he\ntaxes Peter with \"dissimulation\" (ch. ii. 11-13), he is himself\nthe real dissembler, and has carried his dissimulation to amazing\nlengths. If he is in this Epistle contending against the Primitive\nChurch and its leaders, he has concealed his sentiments toward\nthem with an art so crafty as to overreach itself. He has taught\nhis readers to reverence those whom on this hypothesis he was most\nconcerned to discredit. The terms under which he refers to Cephas\nand the Judean Churches would be just so many testimonies against\nhimself, if their doctrine was the \"other gospel\" of the Galatian\ntroublers, and if Paul and the Twelve were rivals for the suffrages\nof the Gentile Christians.\n\nThe one word which wears a colour of detraction is the parenthesis\nin ver. 6 of ch. ii.: \"whatever aforetime[31] they (those of repute)\nwere, makes no difference to me. God accepts no man's person.\" But\nthis is no more than Paul has already said in ch. i. 16, 17. At the\nfirst, after receiving his gospel from the Lord in person, he felt it\nto be out of place for him to \"confer with flesh and blood.\" So now,\neven in the presence of the first Apostles, the earthly companions\nof his Master, he cannot abate his pretensions, nor forget that his\nministry stands on a level as exalted as theirs. This language is\nin precise accord with that of 1 Cor. xv. 10. The suggestion that\nthe repeated \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 conveys a sneer against the leaders at\nJerusalem, as \"seeming\" to be more than they were, is an insult to\nPaul that recoils upon the critics who utter it. The phrase denotes\n\"those of repute,\" \"reputed to be pillars,\" the acknowledged heads of\nthe mother Church. Their position was recognised on all hands; Paul\nassumes it, and argues upon it. He desires to magnify, not to minify,\nthe importance of these illustrious men. They were pillars of his own\ncause. It is a maladroit interpretation that would have Paul cry down\nJames and the Twelve. By so much as he impaired their worth, he must\nassuredly have impaired his own. If their status was mere _seeming_,\nof what value was their endorsement of his? But for a preconceived\nopinion, no one, we may safely affirm, reading this Epistle would\nhave gathered that Peter's \"gospel of the circumcision\" was the\n\"other gospel\" of Galatia, or that the \"certain from James\" of ch.\nii. 12 represented the views and the policy of the first Apostles.\nThe assumption that Peter's dissimulation at Antioch expressed the\nsettled doctrine of the Jewish Apostolic Church, is unhistorical.\nThe Judaizers _abused_ the authority of Peter and James when they\npleaded it in favour of their agitation. So we are told expressly in\nActs xv.; and a candid interpretation of this letter bears out the\nstatements of Luke. In James and Peter, Paul and John, there were\nindeed \"diversities of gifts and operations,\" but they had received\nthe same Spirit; they served the same Lord. They held alike the one\nand only gospel of the grace of God.\n\n [31] We follow Lightfoot in reading the \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 as in ch. i. 23, and\n everywhere else in Paul, as a particle of _time_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n_PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN._\n\n \"Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again to\n Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus also with me. And I went\n up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I\n preach among the Gentiles, but privately before them who were\n of repute, [_asking them_ whether I am running, or had run, in\n vain: but not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was\n compelled to be circumcised. But _it was_[32]] because of the\n false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily to spy\n out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might\n bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place in the way of\n subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel\n might continue with you.\"--GAL. ii. 1-5.\n\n [32] The writer is compelled in this instance to depart from\n the rendering of the English Version, for reasons given in the\n sequel. See also a paper on _Paul and Titus at Jerusalem_, in\n THE EXPOSITOR, 3rd series, vol. vi., pp. 435-442. The last three\n words within the brackets agree with the R.V. _margin_.\n\n\n\"Fourteen years\" had elapsed since Paul left Jerusalem for Tarsus,\nand commenced his Gentile mission.[33] During this long period--a\nfull half of his missionary course--the Apostle was lost to the sight\nof the Judean Churches. For nearly half this time, until Barnabas\nbrought him to Antioch, we have no further trace of his movements.\nBut these years of obscure labour had, we may be sure, no small\ninfluence in shaping the Apostle's subsequent career. It was a kind\nof Apostolic apprenticeship. Then his evangelistic plans were laid;\nhis powers were practised; his methods of teaching and administration\nformed and tested. This first, unnoted period of Paul's missionary\nlife held, we imagine, much the same relation to his public ministry\nthat the time of the Arabian retreat did to his spiritual development.\n\n [33] These fourteen years probably amounted to something less in\n our reckoning,--say, from 38 to 51 A.D. Some six years elapsed\n before Paul was summoned to Antioch.\n\nWe are apt to think of the Apostle Paul only as we see him in the\nfull tide of his activity, carrying \"from Jerusalem round about unto\nIllyricum\" the standard of the cross and planting it in one after\nanother of the great cities of the Empire, \"always triumphing in\nevery place;\" or issuing those mighty Epistles whose voice shakes\nthe world. We forget the earlier term of preparation, these years of\nsilence and patience, of unrecorded toil in a comparatively narrow\nand humble sphere, which had after all their part in making Paul\nthe man he was. If Christ Himself would not \"clutch\" at His Divine\nprerogatives (Phil. ii. 5-11), nor win them by self-assertion and\nbefore the time, how much more did it become His servant to rise to\nhis great office by slow degrees. Paul served first as a private\nmissionary pioneer in his native land, then as a junior colleague and\nassistant to Barnabas, until the summons came to take a higher place,\nwhen \"the signs of an Apostle\" had been fully \"wrought in him.\" Not\nin a day, nor by the effect of a single revelation did he become the\nfully armed and all-accomplished Apostle of the Gentiles whom we meet\nin this Epistle. \"After the space of fourteen years\" it was time for\nhim to stand forth the approved witness and minister of Jesus Christ,\nwhom Peter and John publicly embraced as their equal.\n\nPaul claims here the initiative in the momentous visit to Jerusalem\nundertaken by himself and Barnabas, of which he is going to speak.\nIn Acts xv. 2 he is similarly placed at the head of the deputation\nsent from Antioch about the question of circumcision. The account\nof the preceding missionary tour in Acts xiii., xiv., shows how\nthe headship of the Gentile Church had come to devolve on Paul. In\nLuke's narrative they are \"Barnabas and Saul\" who set out; \"Paul\nand Barnabas\" who return.[34] Under the trials and hazards of this\nadventure--at Paphos, Pisidian Antioch, Lystra--Paul's native\nascendancy and his higher vocation irresistibly declared themselves.\nAge and rank yielded to the fire of inspiration, to the gifts of\nspeech, the splendid powers of leadership which the difficulties\nof this expedition revealed in Paul. Barnabas returned to Antioch\nwith the thought in his heart, \"He must increase; I must decrease.\"\nAnd Barnabas was too generous a man not to yield cheerfully to his\ncompanion the precedence for which God thus marked him out. Yet the\n\"sharp contention\" in which the two men parted soon after this time\n(Acts xv. 36-40), was, we may conjecture, due in some degree to a\nlingering soreness in the mind of Barnabas on this account.\n\n [34] Acts xiii. 2, 7, 13, 43, 45, 46, 50; xiv. 12, 14; xv. 2, 12.\n\nThe Apostle expresses himself with modesty, but in such a way as\nto show that _he_ was regarded in this juncture as the champion of\nthe Gentile cause. The \"revelation\" that prompted the visit came to\nhim. The \"taking up of Titus\" was his distinct act (ver. 1). Unless\nPaul has deceived himself, he was quite the leading figure in the\nCouncil; it was his doctrine and his Apostleship that exercised the\nminds of the chiefs at Jerusalem, when the delegates from Antioch\nappeared before them. Whatever Peter and James may have known or\nsurmised previously concerning Paul's vocation, it was only now that\nit became a public question for the Church. But as matters stood, it\nwas a vital question. The status of uncircumcised Christians, and the\nApostolic rank of Paul, constituted the twofold problem placed before\nthe chiefs of the Jewish Church. At the same time, the Apostle, while\nfixing our attention mainly on his own position, gives to Barnabas\nhis meed of honour; for he says, \"I went up with Barnabas,\"--\"_we_\nnever yielded for an hour to the false brethren,\"--\"the Pillars\ngave _to me and Barnabas_ the right hand of fellowship, that we\nmight go to the Gentiles.\" But it is evident that the elder Gentile\nmissionary stood in the background. By the action that he takes Paul\nunmistakably declares, \"I am the Apostle of the Gentiles;\"[35] and\nthat claim is admitted by the consenting voice of both branches of\nthe Church. The Apostle stepped to the front at this solemn crisis,\nnot for his own rank or office' sake, but at the call of God, in\ndefence of the truth of the gospel and the spiritual freedom of\nmankind.\n\n [35] Comp. Rom. xi. 13; xv. 16, 17.\n\nThis meeting at Jerusalem took place in 51, or it may be, 52 A.D.\nWe make no doubt that it is the same with the Council of Acts xv.\nThe identification has been controverted by several able scholars,\nbut without success. The two accounts are different, but in no sense\ncontradictory. In fact, as Dr. Pfleiderer acknowledges,[36] they\n\"admirably supplement each other. The agreement as to the chief\npoints is in any case greater than the discrepancies in the details;\nand these discrepancies can for the most part be explained by the\ndifferent standpoint of the relaters.\" A difficulty lies, however, in\nthe fact that the historian of the Acts makes this the _third_ visit\nof Paul to Jerusalem subsequently to his conversion; whereas, from\nthe Apostle's statement, it appears to have been the _second_. This\ndiscrepancy has already come up for discussion in the last Chapter\n(p. 92). Two further observations may be added on this point. In the\nfirst place, Paul does not say that he had never been to Jerusalem\nsince the visit of ch. i. 18; he does say, that on this occasion he\n\"went up again,\" and that meanwhile he \"remained unknown by face\" to\nthe Christians of Jud\u00e6a (ch. i. 22)--a fact quite compatible, as we\nhave shown, with what is related in Acts xi. 29, 30. And further, the\nrequest addressed at this conference to the Gentile missionaries,\nthat they should \"remember the poor,\" and the reference made by the\nApostle to his previous zeal in the same business (vv. 9, 10), are in\nagreement with the earlier visit of charity mentioned by Luke.\n\n [36] _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 103. This testimony is the more\n valuable as coming from the ablest living exponent of the Baurian\n theory.\n\nI. The emphasis of ver. 1 rests upon its last clause,--_taking along\nwith me also Titus_. Not \"Titus as well as Barnabas\"--this cannot be\nthe meaning of the \"also\"--for Barnabas was Paul's colleague, deputed\nequally with himself by the Church of Antioch; nor \"Titus as well as\nothers\"--there were other members of the deputation (Acts xv. 2), but\nPaul makes no reference to them. The _also_ (\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76) calls attention to\nthe fact of Paul's taking _Titus_, in view of the sequel; as though\nhe said, \"I not only went up to Jerusalem at this particular time,\nunder Divine direction, but I took along with me Titus besides.\"\nThe prefixed _with_ (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd-) of the Greek participle refers to Paul\nhimself: compare ver. 3, \"Titus who was with me.\" As for the \"certain\nothers\" referred to in Acts xv. 2, they were most likely Jews; or if\nany of them were Gentiles, still it was Titus whom Paul had chosen\nfor his companion; and his case stood out from the rest in such a way\nthat it became the decisive one, the _test-case_ for the matter in\ndispute.\n\nThe mention of _Titus'_ name in this connection was calculated to\nraise a lively interest in the minds of the Apostle's readers. He is\nintroduced as known to the Galatians; indeed by this time his name\nwas familiar in the Pauline Churches, as that of a fellow-traveller\nand trusted helper of the Apostle. He was with Paul in the latter\npart of the third missionary tour--so we learn from the Corinthian\nletters--and therefore probably in the earlier part of the same\njourney, when the Apostle paid his second visit to Galatia. He\nbelonged to the heathen mission, and was Paul's \"true child after a\ncommon faith\" (Tit. i. 4), an uncircumcised man, of Gentile birth\nequally with the Galatians. And now they read of his \"going up to\nJerusalem with Paul,\" to the mother-city of believers, where are\nthe pillars of the Church--the Jewish teachers would say--the true\nApostles of Jesus, where His doctrine is preached in its purity, and\nwhere every Christian is circumcised and keeps the Law. Titus, the\nunclean Gentile, at Jerusalem! How could he be admitted or tolerated\nthere, in the fellowship of the first disciples of the Lord?\nThis question Paul's readers, after what they had heard from the\nCircumcisionists, would be sure to ask. He will answer it directly.\n\nBut the Apostle goes on to say, that he \"went up in accordance\nwith a revelation.\" For this was one of those supreme moments\nin his life when he looked for and received the direct guidance\nof heaven. It was a most critical step to carry this question of\nGentile circumcision up to Jerusalem, and to take Titus with him\nthere, into the enemies' stronghold. Moreover, on the settlement of\nthis matter Paul knew that his Apostolic status depended, so far as\nhuman recognition was concerned. It would be seen whether the Jewish\nChurch would acknowledge the converts of the Gentile mission as\nbrethren in Christ; and whether the first Apostles would receive him,\n\"the untimely one,\" as a colleague of their own. Never had he more\nurgently needed or more implicitly relied upon Divine direction than\nat this hour.\n\n\"And I put before them (the Church at Jerusalem) the gospel which I\npreach among the Gentiles--but privately to those of repute: am I\nrunning (said I), or have I run, in vain?\" The latter clause we read\n_interrogatively_, along with such excellent grammatical interpreters\nas Meyer, Wieseler, and Hofmann. Paul had not come to Jerusalem _in\norder to solve any doubt in his own mind_; but he wished the Church\nof Jerusalem _to declare its mind_ respecting the character of his\nministry. He was not \"running as uncertainly;\" nor in view of the\n\"revelation\" just given him could he have any fear for the result of\nhis appeal. But it was in every way necessary that the appeal should\nbe made.\n\nThe interjected words, \"but privately,\" etc., indicate that there\nwere _two_ meetings during the conference, such as those which seem\nto be distinguished in Acts xv. 4 and 6; and that the Apostle's\nstatement and the question arising out of it were addressed more\npointedly to \"those of repute.\" By this term we understand, here and\nin ver. 6, \"the apostles and elders\" (Acts xv.), headed by Peter and\nJames, amongst whom \"those reputed to be pillars\" are distinguished\nin ver. 9. Paul dwells upon the phrase \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, because, to\nbe sure, it was so often on the lips of the Judaizers, who were in\nthe habit of speaking with an imposing air, and by way of contrast\nwith Paul, of \"the authorities\" (at Jerusalem)--as the designation\nmight appropriately be rendered. These very men whom the Legalists\nwere exalting at Paul's expense, the venerated chiefs of the mother\nChurch, had on this occasion, Paul is going to say, given their\napproval to his doctrine; they declined to impose circumcision on\nGentile believers. The Twelve were not stationary at Jerusalem, and\ntherefore could not form a fixed court of reference there; hence a\ngreater importance accrued to the Elders of the city Church, with the\nrevered James at their head, the brother of the Lord.\n\nThe Apostle, in bringing Titus, had brought up the subject-matter of\nthe controversy. The \"gospel of the uncircumcision\" stood before the\nJewish authorities, an accomplished fact. Titus was there, by the\nside of Paul, a sample--and a noble specimen, we can well believe--of\nthe Gentile Christendom which the Jewish Church must either\nacknowledge or repudiate. How will they treat him? Will they admit\nthis foreign protege of Paul to their communion? Or will they require\nhim first to be circumcised? The question at issue could not take a\nform more crucial for the prejudices of the mother Church. It was one\nthing to acknowledge uncircumcised fellow-believers in the abstract,\naway yonder at Antioch or Iconium, or even at C\u00e6sarea; and another\nthing to see Titus standing amongst them in his heathen uncleanness,\non the sacred soil of Jerusalem, under the shadow of the Temple, and\nto hear Paul claiming for him--for this \"dog\" of a Gentile--equally\nwith himself the rights of Christian brotherhood! The demand was most\noffensive to the pride of Judaism, as no one knew better than Paul;\nand we cannot wonder that a revelation was required to justify the\nApostle in making it. The case of _Trophimus_, whose presence with\nthe Apostle at Jerusalem many years afterwards proved so nearly fatal\n(Acts xxi. 27-30), shows how exasperating to the legalist party his\naction in this instance must have been. Had not Peter and the better\nspirits of the Church in Jerusalem laid to heart the lesson of the\nvision of Joppa, that \"no man must be called common or unclean,\" and\nhad not the wisdom of the Holy Spirit eminently guided this first\nCouncil of the Church,[37] Paul's challenge would have received a\nnegative answer; and Jewish and Gentile Christianity must have been\ndriven asunder.\n\n [37] Acts xv. 28: \"It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.\"\n This was in the Early Church no mere pious official form.\n\nThe answer, the triumphant answer, to Paul's appeal comes in the next\nverse: \"Nay, not even[38] Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was\ncompelled to be circumcised.\" Titus _was not circumcised_, in point\nof fact--how can we doubt this in view of the language of ver. 5:\n\"Not even for an hour did we yield in subjection?\" And he \"was _not\ncompelled_ to be circumcised\"--a mode of putting the denial which\nimplies that in refusing his circumcision urgent solicitation had\nto be withstood, solicitation addressed to Titus himself, as well as\nto the leaders of his party. The kind of pressure brought to bear in\nthe case and the quarter from which it proceeded, the Galatians would\nunderstand from their own experience (ch. vi. 12; comp. ii. 14).\n\n [38] For this use of \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb' \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 compare Acts xix. 2 (here also\n after a question); 1 Cor. iii. 2; iv. 3. We observe a similar\n instance of the phrase in \u00c6schylus, _Pers\u00e6_, l. 792. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb' opposes\n itself to the expectation of the Judaistic \"compellers,\" present\n to the mind of Paul and his readers.\n\nThe attempt made to bring about Titus' circumcision signally failed.\nIts failure was the practical reply to the question which Paul tells\nus (ver. 2) he had put to the authorities in Jerusalem; or, according\nto the more common rendering of ver. 2_b_, it was the answer to the\napprehension under which he addressed himself to them. On the former\nof these views of the connection, which we decidedly prefer, the\nauthorities are clear of any share in the \"compulsion\" of Titus.\nWhen the Apostle gives the statement that his Gentile companion\n\"was not compelled to be circumcised\" as the reply to his appeal to\n\"those of repute,\" it is as much as to say: \"The chiefs at Jerusalem\ndid not require Titus' circumcision. They repudiated the attempt\nof certain parties to force this rite upon him.\" This testimony\nprecisely accords with the terms of the rescript of the Council, and\nwith the speeches of Peter and James, given in Acts xv. But it was\na great point gained to have the liberality of the Jewish Christian\nleaders put to the proof in this way, to have the generous sentiments\nof speech and letter made good in this example of uncircumcised\nChristianity brought to their doors.\n\nTo the authorities at Jerusalem the question put by the delegates\nfrom Antioch on the one side, and by the Circumcisionists on the\nother, was perfectly clear. If they insist on Titus' circumcision,\nthey disown Paul and the Gentile mission: if they accept Paul's\ngospel, they must leave Titus alone. Paul and Barnabas stated the\ncase in a manner that left no room for doubt or compromise. Their\naction was marked, as ver. 5 declares, with the utmost decision. And\nthe response of the Jewish leaders was equally frank and definite. We\nhave no business, says James (Acts xv. 19), \"to trouble those from\nthe Gentiles that turn to God.\" Their judgement is virtually affirmed\nin ver. 3, in reference to Titus, in whose person the Galatians could\nnot fail to see that their own case had been settled by anticipation.\n\"Those of repute\" disowned the Circumcisionists; the demand that\nthe yoke of circumcision should be imposed on the Gentiles had no\nsanction from them. If the Judaizers claimed their sanction, the\nclaim was false.\n\nHere the Apostle pauses, as his Gentile readers must have paused\nand drawn a long breath of relief or of astonishment at what he has\njust alleged. If Titus was not compelled to be circumcised, even at\nJerusalem, who, they might ask, was going to compel _them_?--The full\nstop should therefore be placed at the end of ver. 3, not ver. 2. Vv.\n1-3 form a paragraph complete in itself. Its last sentence resolves\nthe decisive question raised in this visit of Paul's to Jerusalem,\nwhen he \"took with him also Titus.\"\n\nII. The opening words of ver. 4 have all the appearance of commencing\na new sentence. This sentence, concluded in ver. 5, is grammatically\nincomplete; but that is no reason for throwing it upon the previous\nsentence, to the confusion of both. There is a transition of thought,\nmarked by the introductory _But_,[39] from the issue of Paul's second\ncritical visit to Jerusalem (vv. 1-3) to _the cause which made it\nnecessary_. This was the action of \"false brethren,\" to whom the\nApostle made a determined and successful resistance (vv. 4, 5). The\nopening \"But\" does not refer to ver. 3 in particular, rather to the\nentire foregoing paragraph. The ellipsis (after \"But\") is suitably\nsupplied in the marginal rendering of the Revisers, where we take\n_it was_ to mean, not \"Because of the false brethren _Titus was not_\n(or _was not compelled to be_) _circumcised_,\" but \"Because of the\nfalse brethren _this meeting came about_, or, _I took the course\naforesaid_.\"\n\n [39] This particle is a serious obstacle in the way of the\n ordinary punctuation, which attaches the following clause to ver.\n 3. The \u03b4\u1f72 is similar to that of ver. 6 (\u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4. \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd); not\n of \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4' \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 in ver. 2, nor of \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 (Phil. ii.\n 8), which are parenthetical qualifications. And to say, \"Because\n of the false brethren Titus was not compelled to be circumcised,\"\n is simply an inconsequence. Would he have been compelled to be\n circumcised if they had _not_ required it? This is the assumption\n implied by the above construction.\n\nTo know what Paul means by \"false brethren,\" we must turn to ch.\ni. 6-9, iii. 1, iv. 17, v. 7-12, vi. 12-14, in this Epistle; and\nagain to 2 Cor. ii. 17-iii. 1, iv. 2, xi. 3, 4, 12-22, 26; Rom.\nxvi. 17, 18; Phil. iii. 2. They were men bearing the name of Christ\nand professing faith in Him, but Pharisees at heart, self-seeking,\nrancorous, unscrupulous men, bent on exploiting the Pauline Churches\nfor their own advantage, and regarding Gentile converts to Christ as\nso many possible recruits for the ranks of the Circumcision.\n\nBut where, and how, were these traitors \"privily brought in?\"\nBrought in, we answer, to the field of the Gentile mission; and\ndoubtless by local Jewish sympathisers, who introduced them\nwithout the concurrence of the officers of the Church. They \"came\nin privily\"--slipped in by stealth--\"to spy out our liberty which\nwe have in Christ Jesus.\" Now it was at Antioch and in the pagan\nChurches that this liberty existed in its normal exercise--the\nliberty for which our Epistle contends, the enjoyment of Christian\nprivileges independently of Jewish law--in which Paul and his brother\nmissionaries had identified themselves with their Gentile followers.\nThe \"false brethren\" were Jewish spies in the Gentile Christian\ncamp. We do not see how the Galatians could have read the Apostle's\nwords otherwise; nor how it could have occurred to them that he was\nreferring to the way in which these men had been originally \"brought\ninto\" the Jewish Church. That concerned neither him nor them. But\n_their getting into the Gentile fold_ was the serious thing. They\nare the \"certain who came down from Jud\u00e6a, and taught the (Gentile)\nbrethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses,\nye cannot be saved;\" and whom their own Church afterwards repudiated\n(Acts xv. 24). With Antioch for the centre of their operations, these\nmischief-makers disturbed the whole field of Paul and Barnabas'\nlabours in Syria and Cilicia (Acts xv. 23; comp. Gal. i. 21). For\nthe Galatian readers, the terms of this sentence, coming after the\nanathema of ch. i. 6-9, threw a startling light on the character\nof the Judean emissaries busy in their midst. This description of\nthe former \"troublers\" strikes at the Judaic opposition in Galatia.\nIt is as if the Apostle said: \"These false brethren, smuggled in\namongst us, to filch away our liberties in Christ, wolves in sheep's\nclothing--I know them well; I have encountered them before this. I\nnever yielded to their demands a single inch. I carried the struggle\nwith them to Jerusalem. There, in the citadel of Judaism, and before\nthe assembled chiefs of the Judean Church, I vindicated once and for\nall, under the person of Titus, your imperilled Christian rights.\"\n\nBut as the Apostle dilates on the conduct of these Jewish intriguers,\nthe precursors of such an army of troublers, his heart takes fire; in\nthe rush of his emotion he is carried away from the original purport\nof his sentence, and breaks it off with a burst of indignation: \"To\nwhom,\" he cries, \"not even for an hour did we yield by subjection,\nthat the truth of the gospel might abide with you.\" A breakdown\nlike this--an _anacoluthon_, as the grammarians call it--is nothing\nstrange in Paul's style. Despite the shipwrecked grammar, the sense\ncomes off safely enough. The clause, \"we did not yield,\" etc.,\ndescribes in a negative form, and with heightened effect, the course\nthe Apostle had pursued from the first in dealing with the false\nbrethren. In this unyielding spirit he had acted, without a moment's\nwavering, from the hour when, guided by the Holy Spirit, he set\nout for Jerusalem with the uncircumcised Titus by his side, until\nhe heard his Gentile gospel vindicated by the lips of Peter and\nJames, and received from them the clasp of fellowship as Christ's\nacknowledged Apostle to the heathen.\n\nIt was therefore the action of Jewish interlopers, men of the same\nstamp as those infesting the Galatian Churches, which occasioned\nPaul's second, public visit to Jerusalem, and his consultation with\nthe heads of the Judean Church. This decisive course he was himself\ninspired to take; while at the same time it was taken on behalf\nand under the direction of the Church of Antioch, the metropolis\nof Gentile Christianity. He had gone up with Barnabas and \"certain\nothers\"--including the Greek Titus chosen by himself--the company\nforming a representative deputation, of which Paul was the leader and\nspokesman. This measure was the boldest and the only effectual means\nof combatting the Judaistic propaganda. It drew from the authorities\nat Jerusalem the admission that \"Circumcision is nothing,\" and that\nGentile Christians are free from the ritual law. This was a victory\ngained over Jewish prejudice of immense significance for the future\nof Christianity. The ground was already cut from under the feet of\nthe Judaic teachers in Galatia, and of all who should at any time\nseek to impose external rites as things essential to salvation in\nChrist. To all his readers Paul can now say, so far as his part is\nconcerned: _The truth of the gospel abides with you_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n_PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS._\n\n \"But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (what they\n once were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man's\n person)--they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to\n me: but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been intrusted\n with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with _the\n gospel_ of the circumcision (for he that wrought for Peter\n unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also\n unto the Gentiles); and when they perceived the grace that was\n given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed\n to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of\n fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto\n the circumcision; only _they would_ that we should remember the\n poor; which very thing I was also zealous to do.\"--GAL. ii. 6-10.\n\n\nWe have dealt by anticipation, in Chapter VI., with several of the\ntopics raised in this section of the Epistle--touching particularly\nthe import of the phrase \"those of repute,\" and the tone of\ndisparagement in which these dignitaries appear to be spoken of in\nver. 6. But there still remains in these verses matter in its weight\nand difficulty more than sufficient to occupy another Chapter.\n\nThe grammatical connection of the first paragraph, like that of vv.\n2, 3, is involved and disputable. We construe its clauses in the\nfollowing way:--(1) Ver. 6 begins with a _But_, contrasting \"those of\nrepute\" with the \"false brethren\" dealt with in the last sentence.\nIt contains another _anacoluthon_ (or incoherence of language), due\nto the surge of feeling remarked in ver. 4, which still disturbs\nthe Apostle's grammar. He begins: \"But from those reputed to be\nsomething\"--as though he intended to say, \"I received on my part\nnothing, no addition or qualification to my gospel.\" But he has no\nsooner mentioned \"those of repute\" than he is reminded of the studied\nattempt that was made to set up their authority in opposition to\nhis own, and accordingly throws in this protest: \"what they were\naforetime,[40] makes no difference to me: man's person God doth not\naccept.\" But in saying this, Paul has laid down one of his favourite\naxioms, a principle that filled a large place in his thoughts;[41]\nand its enunciation deflects the course of the main sentence, so that\nit is resumed in an altered form: \"For to me those of repute imparted\nnothing.\" Here the _me_ receives a greater emphasis; and _for_ takes\nthe place of _but_. The fact that the first Apostles had nothing to\nimpart to Paul, signally illustrates the Divine impartiality, which\noften makes the last and least in human eyes equal to the first.\n\n [40] For this rendering of \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 comp. ch. i. 13, 23; and see\n Lightfoot, or Beet, _in loc._.\n\n [41] Comp. Rom. ii. 11; 1 Cor. i. 27-31; xv. 9, 10; Eph. vi. 9;\n Col. iii. 25.\n\n(2) Vv. 7-9 state the _positive_, as ver. 6 the _negative_ side of\nthe relation between Paul and the elder Apostles, still keeping\nin view the principle laid down in the former verse. \"Nay, on the\ncontrary, when they saw that I have in charge the gospel of the\nuncircumcision, as Peter that of the circumcision (ver. 7)--and when\nthey perceived the grace that had been given me, James and Cephas and\nJohn, those renowned pillars of the Church, gave the right hand of\nfellowship to myself and Barnabas, agreeing that we should go to the\nGentiles, while they laboured amongst the Jews\" (ver. 9).\n\n(3) Ver. 8 comes in as a parenthesis, explaining how the authorities\nat Jerusalem came to see that this trust belonged to Paul. \"For,\"\nhe says, \"He that in Peter's case displayed His power in making\nhim (above all others) Apostle of the Circumcision, did as much\nfor me in regard to the Gentiles.\" It is not human ordination, but\nDivine inspiration that makes a minister of Jesus Christ. The noble\nApostles of Jesus had the wisdom to see this. It had pleased God to\nbestow this grace on their old Tarsian persecutor; and they frankly\nacknowledged the fact.\n\nThus Paul sets forth, in the first place, _the completeness of\nhis Apostolic qualifications_, put to proof at the crisis of the\ncircumcision controversy; and in the second place, _the judgement\nformed respecting him and his office by the first Apostles and\ncompanions of the Lord_.\n\nI. \"To me those of repute added nothing.\" Paul had spent but a\nfortnight in the Christian circle of Jerusalem, fourteen years ago.\nOf its chiefs he had met at that time only Peter and James, and them\nin the capacity of a visitor, not as a disciple or a candidate for\noffice. He had never sought the opportunity, nor felt the need, of\nreceiving instruction from the elder Apostles during all the years in\nwhich he had preached Christ amongst the heathen. It was not likely\nhe would do so now. When he came into conference and debate with them\nat the Council, he showed himself their equal, neither in knowledge\nnor authority \"a whit behind the very chiefest.\" And they were\nconscious of the same fact.\n\nOn the essentials of the gospel Paul found himself in agreement with\nthe Twelve. This is implied in the language of ver. 6. When one\nwrites, \"A adds nothing to B,\" one assumes that B has already what\nbelongs to A, and not something different. Paul asserts in the most\npositive terms he can command, that his intercourse with the holders\nof the primitive Christian tradition left him as a minister of Christ\nexactly where he was before. \"On me,\" he says, \"they conferred\nnothing\"--rather, perhaps, \"_addressed no communication_ to me.\" The\nword used appears to deny their having made any motion of the kind.\nThe Greek verb is the same that was employed in ch. i. 16, a rare and\ndelicate compound.[42] Its meaning varies, like that of our _confer_,\n_communicate_, as it is applied in a more or less active sense. In\nthe former place Paul had said that he \"did not confer with flesh and\nblood\"; now he adds, that flesh and blood did not confer anything\nupon him. Formerly he did not bring his commission to lay it before\nmen; now they had nothing to bring on their part to lay before him.\nThe same word affirms the Apostle's independence at both epochs,\nshown in the first instance by his reserve toward the dignitaries at\nJerusalem, and in the second by their reserve toward him. Conscious\nof his Divine call, he sought no patronage from the elder Apostles\nthen; and they, recognising that call, offered him no such patronage\nnow. Paul's gospel for the Gentiles was complete, and sufficient\nunto itself. His ministry showed no defect in quality or competence.\nThere was nothing about it that laid it open to correction, even on\nthe part of those wisest and highest in dignity amongst the personal\nfollowers of Jesus.\n\n [42] We cannot explain \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03ad\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf here by the \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd of\n ver. 2, as though Paul wished to say, \"I imparted to them my\n gospel; they imparted to me nothing _further_.\" For\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2- implies\n _direction_, rather than _addition_. See Meyer on this verb in\n ch. i. 16.\n\nSo Paul declares; and we can readily believe him. Nay, we are tempted\nto think that it was rather the Pillars who might need to learn\nfrom him, than he from them. In doctrine, Paul holds the primacy in\nthe band of the Apostles. While all were inspired by the Spirit of\nChrist, the Gentile Apostle was in many ways a more richly furnished\nman than any of the rest. The Paulinism of Peter's First Epistle\ngoes to show that the debt was on the other side. Their earlier\nprivileges and priceless store of recollections of \"all that Jesus\ndid and taught,\" were matched on Paul's side by a penetrating logic,\na breadth and force of intellect applied to the facts of revelation,\nand a burning intensity of spirit, which in their combination were\nunique. The Pauline teaching, as it appears in the New Testament,\nbears in the highest degree the marks of original genius, the stamp\nof a mind whose inspiration is its own.\n\nModern criticism even exaggerates Paul's originality. It leaves\nthe other Apostles little more than a negative part to play in the\ndevelopment of Christian truth. In some of its representations, the\nfigure of Paul appears to overshadow even that of the Divine Master.\nIt was Paul's creative genius, it is said, his daring idealism, that\ndeified the human Jesus, and transformed the scandal of the cross\ninto the glory of an atonement reconciling the world to God. Such\ntheories Paul himself would have regarded with horror. \"I received\n_of the Lord_ that which I delivered unto you:\" such is his uniform\ntestimony. If he owed so little as a minister of Christ to his\nbrother Apostles, he felt with the most sincere humility that he\nowed everything to Christ. The agreement of Paul's teaching with\nthat of the other New Testament writers, and especially with that of\nJesus in the Gospels, proves that, however distinct and individual\nhis conception of the common gospel, none the less there was a\ncommon gospel of Christ, and he did not speak of his own mind. The\nattempts made to get rid of this agreement by postdating the New\nTestament documents, and by explaining away the larger utterances of\nJesus found in the Gospels as due to Paulinist interpolation, are\nunavailing. They postulate a craftiness of ingenuity on the part of\nthe writers of the incriminated books, and an ignorance in those who\nfirst received them, alike inconceivable. Paul did not build up the\nsplendid and imperishable fabric of his theology on some speculation\nof his own. Its foundation lies in the person and the teaching of\nJesus Christ, and was common to Paul with James and Cephas and\nJohn. \"Whether I or they,\" he testifies, \"so we preach, and so ye\nbelieved\" (1 Cor. xv. 11). Paul satisfied himself at this conference\nthat he and the Twelve taught the same gospel. Not in its primary\ndata, but in their logical development and application, lies the\nspecifically _Pauline_ in Paulinism. The harmony between Paul and the\nother Apostolic leaders has the peculiar value which belongs to the\nagreement of minds of different orders, working independently.\n\nThe Judaizers, however, persistently asserted Paul's dependence on\nthe elder Apostles. \"The authority of the Primitive Church, the\nApostolic tradition of Jerusalem\"--this was the fulcrum of their\nargument. Where could Paul, they asked, have derived his knowledge\nof Christ, but from this fountain-head? And the power that made\nhim, could unmake him. Those who commissioned him had the right to\noverrule him, or even to revoke his commission. Was it not known\nthat he had from time to time resorted to Jerusalem; that he had\nonce publicly submitted his teaching to the examination of the heads\nof the Church there? The words of ver. 6 contradict these malicious\ninsinuations. Hence the positiveness of the Apostle's self-assertion.\nIn the Corinthian Epistles his claim to independence is made in\ngentler style, and with expressions of humility that might have\nbeen misunderstood here. But the position Paul takes up is the\nsame in either case: \"I am an Apostle. I have seen Jesus our Lord.\nYou--Corinthians, Galatians--are my work in the Lord.\" That Peter\nand the rest were in the old days so near to the Master, \"makes no\ndifference\" to Paul. They are what they are--their high standing is\nuniversally acknowledged, and Paul has no need or wish to question\nit; but, by the grace of God, _he_ also is what he is (1 Cor. xv.\n10). Their Apostleship does not exclude or derogate from his.\n\nThe self-depreciation, the keen sense of inferiority in outward\nrespects, so evident in Paul's allusions to this subject elsewhere,\nis after all not wanting here. For when he says, \"God regards\nnot _man's person_,\" it is evident that in respect of visible\nqualifications Paul felt that he had few pretensions to make.\nAppearances were against him. And those who \"glory in appearance\"\nwere against him too (2 Cor. v. 12). Such men could not appreciate\nthe might of the Spirit that wrought in Paul, nor the sovereignty of\nDivine election. They \"reckoned\" of the Apostle \"as though he walked\naccording to flesh\" (2 Cor. x. 2). It seemed to them obvious, as\na matter of course, that he was far below the Twelve. With men of\nworldly wisdom the Apostle did not expect that his arguments would\nprevail. His appeal was to \"the spiritual, who judge all things.\"\n\nSo we come back to the declaration of the Apostle in ch. i. 11:\n\"I give you to know, brethren, that my gospel is not according to\nman.\" Man had no hand either in laying its foundation or putting\non the headstone. Paul's predecessors in Apostolic office did not\nimpart the gospel to him at the outset; nor at a later time had they\nattempted to make any addition to the doctrine he had taught far and\nwide amongst the heathen. His Apostleship was from first to last a\nsupernatural gift of grace.\n\nII. Instead, therefore, of assuming to be his superiors, or offering\nto bestow something of their own on Paul, _the three renowned pillars\nof the faith at Jerusalem acknowledged him as a brother Apostle_.\n\n\"They saw that I am intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision.\"\nThe form of the verb implies a trust given in the past and taking\neffect in the present, a settled fact. Once for all, this charge had\ndevolved on Paul. He is \"appointed herald and apostle\" of \"Christ\nJesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all,--teacher of the Gentiles\nin faith and truth\" (1 Tim. ii. 6, 7). That office Paul still holds.\nHe is the leader of Christian evangelism. Every new movement in\nheathen missionary enterprise looks to his teaching for guidance and\ninspiration.\n\nThe conference at Jerusalem in itself furnished conclusive evidence\nof Paul's Apostolic commission. The circumcision controversy was a\ntest not only for Gentile Christianity, but at the same time for its\nApostle and champion. Paul brought to this discussion a knowledge and\ninsight, a force of character, a conscious authority and unction of\nthe Holy Spirit, that powerfully impressed the three great men who\nlistened to him. The triumvirate at Jerusalem well knew that Paul\nhad not received his marvellous gifts through their hands. Nor was\nthere anything lacking to him which they felt themselves called upon\nto supply. They could only say, \"This is the Lord's doing; and it\nis marvellous in our eyes.\" Knowing, as Peter at least, we presume,\nhad done for many years,[43] the history of Paul's conversion, and\nseeing as they now did the conspicuous Apostolic signs attending\nhis ministry, James and Cephas and John could only come to one\nconclusion. The gospel of the uncircumcision, they were convinced,\nwas committed to Paul, and his place in the Church was side by side\nwith Peter. Peter must have felt as once before on a like occasion:\n\"If God gave unto him a gift equal to that He gave to me, who am\nI, that I should be able to hinder God?\" (Acts xi. 17). It was not\nfor them because of their elder rank and dignity to debate with God\nin this matter, and to withhold their recognition from His \"chosen\nvessel.\"\n\n [43] Ch. i. 18. See Chapter V., p. 87.\n\nJohn had not forgotten his Master's reproof for banning the man\nthat \"followeth not with us\" (Luke ix. 49; Mark ix. 38). They\n\"recognised,\" Paul says, \"the grace that had been given me;\" and by\nthat he means, to be sure, the undeserved favour that raised him\nto his Apostolic office.[44] This recognition was given to _Paul_.\nBarnabas shared the \"fellowship.\" His hand was clasped by the three\nchiefs at Jerusalem, not less warmly than that of his younger\ncomrade. But it is in the singular number that Paul speaks of \"the\ngrace that was given _me_,\" and of the \"trust in the gospel\" and the\n\"working of God _unto Apostleship_.\"\n\n [44] See Rom. i. 5; 1 Cor. xv. 10; Eph. iii. 2, 7, 8; 1 Tim. i.\n 13.\n\nWhy then does not Paul say outright, \"they acknowledged me an\nApostle, the equal of Peter?\" Some are bold enough to say--_Holsten_\nin particular--\"Because this is just what the Jerusalem chiefs never\ndid, and never could have done.\"[45] We will only reply, that if\nthis were the case, the passage is a continued _suggestio falsi_.\nNo one could write the words of vv. 7-9, without intending his\nreaders to believe that such a recognition took place. Paul avoids\nthe point-blank assertion, with a delicacy that any man of tolerable\nmodesty will understand. Even the appearance of \"glorying\" was\nhateful to him (2 Cor. x. 17; xi. 1; xii. 1-5, 11).\n\n [45] _Zum Evangelien d. Paulus und d. Petrus_, p. 273. Holsten is\n the keenest and most logical of all the Baurian succession.\n\nThe Church at Jerusalem, as we gather from vv. 7, 8, observed in\nPaul \"signs of the Apostle\" resembling those borne by Peter. His\nGentile commission ran parallel with Peter's Jewish commission. The\nlabours of the two men were followed by the same kind of success,\nand marked by similar displays of miraculous power. The like seal of\nGod was stamped on both. This correspondence runs through the Acts\nof the Apostles. Compare, for example, Paul's sermon at Antioch in\nPisidia with that of Peter on the Day of Pentecost; the healing of\nthe Lystran cripple and the punishment of Elymas, with the case of\nthe lame man at the Temple gate and the encounter of Peter and Simon\nMagus. The conjunction of the names of Peter and Paul was familiar\nto the Apostolic Church. The parallelism between the course of these\ngreat Apostles was no invention of second-century orthodoxy, set up\nin the interests of a \"reconciling hypothesis;\" it attracted public\nattention as early as 51 A.D., while they were still in their mid\ncareer. If this idea so strongly possessed the minds of the Jewish\nChristian leaders and influenced their action at the Council of\nJerusalem, we need not be surprised that it should dominate Luke's\nnarrative to the extent that it does. The allusions to Peter in 1\nCorinthians[46] afford further proof that in the lifetime of the two\nApostles it was a common thing to link their names together.\n\n [46] Ch. i. 12; iii. 22; ix. 5.\n\nBut had not Peter also a share in the Gentile mission? Does not the\ndivision of labour made at this conference appear to shut out the\nsenior Apostle from a field to which he had the prior claim? \"Ye\nknow,\" said Peter at the Council, \"how that a good while ago God\nmade choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the\nword of the gospel, and believe\" (Acts xv. 7). To Peter was assigned\nthe double honour of \"opening the door of faith\" both to Jew and\nGentile. This experience made him the readier to understand Paul's\nposition, and gave him the greater weight in the settlement of the\nquestion at issue. And not Peter alone, but Philip the evangelist\nand other Jewish Christians had carried the gospel across the line\nof Judaic prejudice, before Paul appeared on the scene. Barnabas and\nSilas were both emissaries of Jerusalem. So that the mother Church,\nif she could not claim Paul as her son, had nevertheless a large\nstake in the heathen mission. But when Paul came to the front, when\nhis miraculous call, his incomparable gifts and wonderful success\nhad made themselves known, it was evident to every discerning mind\nthat he was the man chosen by God to direct this great work. Peter\nhad _opened_ the door of faith to the heathen, and had bravely kept\nit open; but it was for Paul to lead the Gentile nations through the\nopen door, and to make a home for them within the fold of Christ. The\nmen who had laboured in this field hitherto were Paul's forerunners.\nAnd Peter does not hesitate to acknowledge the younger Apostle's\nspecial fitness for this wider province of their common work; and\nwith the concurrence of James and John he yields the charge of it to\nhim.\n\nLet us observe that it is two different _provinces_, not different\ngospels, that are in view. When the Apostle speaks of \"the gospel\nof the uncircumcision\" as committed to himself, and that \"of the\ncircumcision\" to Peter, he never dreams of any one supposing, as some\nof his modern critics persist in doing, that he meant two different\n_doctrines_. How can that be possible, when he has declared those\n_anathema_ who preach any other gospel? He has laid his gospel before\nthe heads of the Jerusalem Church. Nothing has occurred there,\nnothing is hinted here, to suggest the existence of a \"radical\ndivergence.\" If James and the body of the Judean Church really\nsympathised with the Circumcisionists, with those whom the Apostle\ncalls \"false brethren,\" how could he with any sincerity have come to\nan agreement with them, knowing that this tremendous gulf was lying\nall the while between the Pillars and himself? Zeller argues that the\ntransaction was simply a pledge of \"reciprocal toleration, a merely\nexternal concordat between Paul and the original Apostles.\"[47] The\nclasp of brotherly friendship was a sorry farce, if that were all\nit meant--if Paul and the Three just consented for the time to slur\nover irreconcilable differences; while Paul in turn has glossed over\nthe affair for us in these artful verses! Baur, with characteristic\n_finesse_, says on the same point: \"The \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 was always a\ndivision; it could only be brought into effect by one party going\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7, the other \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd. As the Jewish Apostles\ncould allege nothing against the principles on which Paul founded\nhis evangelical mission, they were obliged to recognise them in a\ncertain manner; but their recognition was a mere outward one. They\nleft him to work on these principles still further in the cause of\nthe gospel among the Gentiles; but for themselves they did not desire\nto know anything more about them.\"[48] So that, according to the\nT\u00fcbingen critics, we witness in ver. 9 not a union, but a divorce!\nThe Jewish Apostles recognise Paul as a brother, only in order to get\nrid of him. Can misinterpretation be more unjust than this? Paul does\nnot say, \"They gave us the right hand of fellowship _on condition\nthat_,\" but, \"_in order that_ we should go this way, they that.\" As\nmuch as to say: The two parties came together and entered into a\ncloser union, so that with the best mutual understanding each might\ngo its own way and pursue its proper work in harmony with the other.\nFor Paul it would have been a sacrilege to speak of the diplomatic\ncompromise which Baur and Zeller describe as \"giving the right hand\nof fellowship.\"\n\n [47] _The Acts of the Apostles critically investigated_, vol.\n ii., pp. 28, 30: Eng. Trans.\n\n [48] _Paulus_, vol. i., p. 130: Eng. Trans.\n\nNever did the Church more deeply realise than at her first Council\nthe truth, that \"there is one body and one Spirit; one Lord, one\nfaith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all,\nand through all, and in all\" (Eph. iv. 4-6). Paul still seems to\nfeel his hand in the warm grasp of Peter and of John when he writes\nto the Ephesians of \"the foundation of the Apostles and prophets,\nwith Christ Jesus Himself for chief corner-stone; in whom the whole\nbuilding fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the\nLord\" (ch. ii. 20, 21). Alas for the criticism that is obliged to see\nin words like these the invention of second-century churchmanship,\nputting into the mouth of Paul catholic sentiments of which in\nreality he knew nothing! Such writers know nothing of the power of\nthat fellowship of the Spirit which reigned in the glorious company\nof the Apostles.\n\n\"Only they would have us remember the poor\"--a circumstance mentioned\npartly by way of reminder to the Galatians touching the collection\nfor Jerusalem, which Paul had already set on foot amongst them\n(1 Cor. xvi. 1). The request was prompted by the affectionate\nconfidence with which the Jewish chiefs embraced Paul and Barnabas.\nIt awakened an eager response in the Apostle's breast. His love to\nhis Jewish kindred made him welcome the suggestion. Moreover every\ndeed of charity rendered by the wealthier Gentile Churches to \"the\npoor saints in Jerusalem,\" was another tie helping to bind the two\ncommunities to each other. Of such liberality Antioch, under the\ndirection of the Gentile missionaries, had already set the example\n(Acts xi. 29, 30).\n\n * * * * *\n\n_James_, _Peter_, _John_, and _Paul_--it was a memorable day when\nthese four men met face to face. What a mighty quaternion! Amongst\nthem they have virtually made the New Testament and the Christian\nChurch. They represent the four sides of the one foundation of the\nCity of God. Of the Evangelists, Matthew holds affinity with James;\nMark with Peter; and Luke with Paul. James clings to the past and\nembodies the transition from Mosaism to Christianity. Peter is the\nman of the present, quick in thought and action, eager, buoyant,\nsusceptible. Paul holds the future in his grasp, and schools the\nunborn nations. John gathers present, past, and future into one,\nlifting us into the region of eternal life and love.\n\nWith Peter and James Paul had met before, and was to meet again. But\nso far as we can learn, this was the only occasion on which his path\ncrossed that of _John_. Nor is this Apostle mentioned again in Paul's\nletters. In the Acts he appears but once or twice, standing silent in\nPeter's shadow. A holy reserve surrounds John's person in the earlier\nApostolic history. His hour was not yet come. But his name ranked in\npublic estimation amongst the three foremost of the Jewish Church;\nand he exercised, doubtless, a powerful, though quiet, conciliatory\ninfluence in the settlement of the Gentile question. The personality\nof Paul excited, we may be sure, the profoundest interest in such a\nmind as that of John. He absorbed, and yet in a sense transcended,\nthe Pauline theology. The Apocalypse, although the most Judaic book\nof the New Testament, is penetrated with the influence of Paulinism.\nThe detection in it of a covert attack on the Gentile Apostle is\nsimply one of the mare's nests of a super-subtle and suspicious\ncriticism. John was to be the heir of Paul's labours at Ephesus and\nin Asia Minor. And John's long life, touching the verge of the second\ncentury, his catholic position, his serene and lofty spirit, blending\nin itself and resolving into a higher unity the tendencies of James\nand Peter and Paul, give us the best assurance that in the Apostolic\nage there was indeed \"One, holy, catholic, Apostolic Church.\"\n\nPaul's fellowship with Peter and with James was cordial and endeared.\nBut to hold the hand of John, \"the disciple whom Jesus loved,\" was\na yet higher satisfaction. That clasp symbolized a union between\nmen most opposite in temperament and training, and brought to the\nknowledge of Christ in very different ways, but whose communion in\nHim was deep as the life eternal. Paul and John are the two master\nminds of the New Testament. Of all men that ever lived, these two\nbest understood Jesus Christ.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n_PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH._\n\n \"But when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face,\n because he stood condemned. For before that certain came from\n James, he did eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he\n drew back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the\n circumcision. And the rest of the Jews dissembled likewise with\n him; insomuch that even Barnabas was carried away with their\n dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly\n according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Cephas before\n _them_ all, If thou, being a Jew, livest as do the Gentiles,\n and not as do the Jews, how compellest thou the Gentiles to\n live as do the Jews? We being Jews by nature, and not sinners\n of the Gentiles, yet knowing that a man is not justified by\n works of law, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, even we\n believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith\n in Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the\n works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we\n sought to be justified in Christ, we ourselves also were found\n sinners, is Christ a minister of sin? God forbid. For if I\n build up again those things which I destroyed, I prove myself a\n transgressor.\"--GAL. ii. 11-18.\n\n\nThe conference at Jerusalem issued in the formal recognition by the\nPrimitive Church of Gentile Christianity, and of Paul's plenary\nApostleship. And it brought Paul into brotherly relations with the\nthree great leaders of Jewish Christianity. But this fellowship\nwas not to continue undisturbed. The same cause was still at work\nwhich had compelled the Apostle to go up to Jerusalem, taking Titus\nwith him. The leaven of Pharisaic legalism remained in the Church.\nIndeed, as time went on and the national fanaticism grew more\nviolent, this spirit of intolerance became increasingly bitter and\nactive. The address of James to Paul on the occasion of his last\nvisit to the Holy City, shows that the Church of Jerusalem was at\nthis time in a state of the most sensitive jealousy in regard to the\nLaw, and that the legalistic prejudices always existing in it had\ngained a strength with which it was difficult to cope (Acts xxi.\n17-25).\n\nBut for the present the Judaizing faction had received a check. It\ndoes not appear that the party ever again insisted on circumcision as\na thing essential to salvation for the Gentiles. The utterances of\nPeter and James at the Council, and the circular addressed therefrom\nto the Gentile Churches, rendered this impossible. The Legalists made\na change of front; and adopted a subtler and seemingly more moderate\npolicy. _They now preached circumcision as the prerogative of the Jew\nwithin the Church, and as a counsel of perfection for the Gentile\nbeliever in Christ_ (ch. iii. 3). To quote the rescript of Acts xv.\nagainst this altered form of the circumcisionist doctrine, would have\nbeen wide of the mark.\n\nIt is against this newer type of Judaistic teaching that our Epistle\nis directed.[49] Circumcision, its advocates argued, was a Divine\nordinance that must have its benefit. God has given to Israel an\nindefeasible pre-eminence in His kingdom.[50] Law-keeping children\nof Abraham enter the new Covenant on a higher footing than \"sinners\nof the Gentiles:\" they are still the elect race, the holy nation. If\nthe Gentiles wish to share with them, they must add to their faith\ncircumcision, they must complete their imperfect righteousness by\nlegal sanctity. So they might hope to enter on the full heritage of\nthe sons of Abraham; they would be brought into communion with the\nfirst Apostles and the Brother of the Lord; they would be admitted to\nthe inner circle of the kingdom of God. The new Legalists sought, in\nfact, to superimpose Jewish on Gentile Christianity. They no longer\nrefused all share in Christ to the uncircumcised; they offered them\na larger share. So we construe the teaching which Paul had to combat\nin the second stage of his conflict with Judaism, to which his four\nmajor Epistles belong. And the signal for this renewed struggle was\ngiven by the collision with Peter at Antioch.\n\n [49] Rom. ii. 25-iii. 1.\n\n [50] Rom. i. 16; ii. 9, 10; ix. 4, 5; xi. 1, 2.\n\nThis encounter did not, we think, take place on the return of Paul\nand Barnabas from the Council. The compact of Jerusalem secured to\nthe Church a few years of rest from the Judaistic agitation. The\nThessalonian Epistles, written in 52 or 53 A.D., go to show, not\nonly that the Churches of Macedonia were free from the legalist\ncontention, but that it did not at this period occupy the Apostle's\nmind. Judas Barsabbas and Silas--not Peter--accompanied the Gentile\nmissionaries in returning to Antioch; and Luke gives, in Acts xv., a\ntolerably full account of the circumstances which transpired there in\nthe interval before the second missionary tour, without the slightest\nhint of any visit made at this time by the Apostle Peter. We can\nscarcely believe that the circumcision party had already recovered,\nand increased its influence, to the degree that it must have done\nwhen \"even Barnabas was carried away\"; still less that Peter on\nthe very morrow of the settlement at Jerusalem and of his fraternal\ncommunion there with Paul would show himself so far estranged.\n\nWhen, therefore, did \"Cephas come down to Antioch?\" The Galatians\nevidently knew. The Judaizers had given their account of the matter,\nto Paul's disadvantage. Perhaps he had referred to it himself on his\nlast visit to Galatia, when we know he spoke explicitly and strongly\nagainst the Circumcisionists (ch. i. 9). Just before his arrival\nin Galatia on this occasion he had \"spent some time\" at Antioch\n(Acts xviii. 22, 23), in the interval between the second and third\nmissionary journeys. Luke simply mentions the fact, without giving\nany details. This is the likeliest opportunity for the meeting of\nthe two Apostles in the Gentile capital. M. Sabatier,[51] in the\nfollowing sentences, appears to us to put the course of events in\nits true light:--\"Evidently the Apostle had quitted Jerusalem and\nundertaken his second missionary journey full of satisfaction at the\nvictory he had gained, and free from anxiety for the future. The\ndecisive moment of the crisis therefore necessarily falls between\nthe Thessalonian and Galatian Epistles. What had happened in the\nmeantime? _The violent discussion with Peter at Antioch_ (Gal.\nii. 11-21), and all that this account reveals to us,--the arrival\nof the emissaries from James in the pagan-Christian circle, the\ncounter-mission organized by the Judaizers to rectify the work of\nPaul. A new situation suddenly presents itself to the eyes of the\nApostle on his return from his second missionary journey. He is\ncompelled to throw himself into the struggle, and in doing so to\nformulate in all its rigour his principle of the abolishment of the\nLaw.\"\n\n [51] In his _L'ap\u00f4tre Paul: esquisse d'une histoire de sa\n pens\u00e9e_, an admirable work, to which the writer is under great\n obligation.\n\nThe \"troublers\" in this instance were \"certain from James.\" Like the\n\"false brethren\"[52] who appeared at Antioch three years before, they\ncame from the mother Church, over which James presided. The Judaizing\nteachers at Corinth had their \"commendatory letters\" (2 Cor. iii.\n1), derived assuredly from the same quarter. In all likelihood,\ntheir confederates in Galatia brought similar credentials. We have\nalready seen that the authority of the Primitive Church was the chief\nweapon used by Paul's adversaries. These letters of commendation\nwere part of the machinery of the anti-Pauline agitation. How the\nJudaizers obtained these credentials, and in what precise relation\nthey stood to James, we can only conjecture. Had the Apostle held\nJames responsible for their action, he would not have spared him any\nmore than he has done Peter. James held a quasi-pastoral relation to\nChristian Jews of the Dispersion. And as he addressed his Epistle\nto them, so he would be likely on occasion to send delegates to\nvisit them. Perhaps the Circumcisionists found opportunity to\npass themselves off in this character; or they may have abused\na commission really given them, by interfering with Gentile\ncommunities. That the Judaistic emissaries in some way or other\nadopted false colours, is plainly intimated in 2 Cor. xi. 13. James,\nliving always at Jerusalem, being moreover a man of simple character,\ncould have little suspected the crafty plot which was carried forward\nunder his name.\n\n [52] See Chapter VII. pp. 109, 110.\n\nThese agents addressed themselves in the first instance to _the\nJews_, as their commission from Jerusalem probably entitled them\nto do. They plead for the maintenance of the sacred customs. They\ninsist that the Mosaic rites carry with them an indelible sanctity;\nthat their observance constitutes a Church within the Church. If\nthis separation is once established, and the Jewish believers in\nChrist can be induced to hold themselves aloof and to maintain the\n\"advantage of circumcision,\" the rest will be easy. The way will then\nbe open to \"compel the Gentiles to Judaize.\" For unless they do this,\nthey must be content to remain on a lower level, in a comparatively\nmenial position, resembling that of uncircumcised proselytes in\nthe Synagogue. The circular of the Jerusalem Council may have been\ninterpreted by the Judaists in this sense, as though it laid down\nthe terms, not of full communion between Jew and Gentile believers,\nbut only of a permissive, secondary recognition. At Antioch the new\ncampaign of the Legalists was opened, and apparently with signal\nsuccess. In Galatia and Corinth we see it in full progress.\n\nThe withdrawal of Peter and the other Jews at Antioch from the table\nof the Gentiles virtually \"compelled\" the latter \"to Judaize.\" Not\nthat the Jewish Apostle had this intention in his mind. He was made\nthe tool of designing men. By \"separating himself\" he virtually said\nto every uncircumcised brother, \"Stand by thyself, I am holier than\nthou.\" Legal conformity on the part of the Gentiles was made the\ncondition of their communion with Jewish Christians--a demand simply\nfatal to Christianity. It re-established the principle of salvation\nby works in a more invidious form. To supplement the righteousness\nof faith by that of law, meant to _supplant_ it. To admit that\nthe Israelite by virtue of his legal observances stood in a higher\nposition than \"sinners of the Gentiles,\" was to stultify the doctrine\nof the cross, to make Christ's death a gratuitous sacrifice. Peter's\nerror, pushed to its logical consequences, involved the overthrow of\nthe Gospel. This the Gentile Apostle saw at a glance. The situation\nwas one of imminent danger. Paul needed all his wisdom, and all his\ncourage and promptitude to meet it.\n\nIt had been Peter's previous rule, since the vision of Joppa, to lay\naside Jewish scruples of diet and to live in free intercourse with\nGentile brethren. He \"was wont to eat with the Gentiles. Though a\nborn Jew, he lived in Gentile fashion\"--words unmistakably describing\nPeter's general habit in such circumstances. This Gentile conformity\nof Peter was a fact of no small moment for the Galatian readers. It\ncontravenes the assertion of a radical divergence between Petrine and\nPauline Christianity, whether made by Ebionites or Baurians.\n\nThe Jewish Apostle's present conduct was an act of \"dissimulation.\"\nHe was belying his known convictions, publicly expressed and acted\non for years. Paul's challenge assumes that his fellow-Apostle is\nacting insincerely. And this assumption is explained by the account\nfurnished in the Acts of the Apostles respecting Peter's earlier\nrelations with Gentile Christianity (ch. x. 1-xi. 18; xv. 6-11). The\nstrength of Paul's case lay in the conscience of Peter himself. The\nconflict at Antioch, so often appealed to in proof of the rooted\nopposition between the two Apostles, in reality gives evidence to the\ncontrary effect. Here the maxim strictly applies, _Exceptio probat\nregulam_.\n\nPeter's lapse is quite intelligible. No man who figures in the New\nTestament is better known to us. Honest, impulsive, ready of speech,\nfull of contagious enthusiasm, brave as a lion, firm as a rock\nagainst open enemies, he possessed in a high degree the qualities\nwhich mark out a leader of men. He was of the stuff of which Christ\nmakes His missionary heroes. But there was a strain of weakness in\nPeter's nature. He was _pliable_. He was too much at the mercy of\nsurroundings. His denial of Jesus set this native fault in a light\nterribly vivid and humiliating. It was an act of \"dissimulation.\" In\nhis soul there was a fervent love to Christ. His zeal had brought\nhim to the place of danger. But for the moment he was alone. Public\nopinion was all against him. A panic fear seized his brave heart. He\nforgot himself; he denied the Master whom he loved more than life.\nHis courage had failed; never his faith. \"Turned back again\" from his\ncoward flight, Peter had indeed \"strengthened his brethren\" (Luke\nxxii. 31, 32). He proved a tower of strength to the infant Church,\nworthy of his cognomen of the _rock_. For more than twenty years he\nhad stood unshaken. No name was so honoured in the Church as Peter's.\nFor Paul to be compared to him was the highest possible distinction.\n\nAnd yet, after all this lapse of time, and in the midst of so\nglorious a career, the old, miserable weakness betrays him once more.\nHow admonitory is the lesson! The sore long since healed over, the\ninfirmity of nature out of which we seemed to have been completely\ntrained, may yet break out again, to our shame and undoing. Had Peter\nfor a moment forgotten the sorrowful warning of Gethsemane? Be it\nours to \"watch and pray, lest we enter into temptation.\"\n\nWe have reason to believe that, if Peter rashly erred, he freely\nacknowledged his error, and honoured his reprover. Both the Epistles\nthat bear his name, in different ways, testify to the high value\nwhich their author set upon the teaching of \"our beloved brother\nPaul.\" Tradition places the two men at Rome side by side in their\nlast days; as though even in their death these glorious Apostles\nshould not be divided, despite the attempts of faction and mistrust\nto separate them.\n\nFew incidents exhibit more strongly than this the grievous\nconsequences that may ensue from a seemingly trivial moral error.\nIt looked a little thing that Peter should prefer to take his meals\naway from Gentile company. And yet, as Paul tells him, his withdrawal\nwas a virtual rejection of the Gospel, and imperilled the most\nvital interests of Christianity. By this act the Jewish Apostle\ngave a handle to the adversaries of the Church which they have\nused for generations and for ages afterwards. The dispute which it\noccassioned could never be forgotten. In the second century it still\ndrew down on Paul the bitter reproaches of the Judaizing faction.\nAnd in our own day the rationalistic critics have been able to turn\nit to marvellous account. It supplies the corner-stone of their\n\"scientific reconstruction\" of Biblical theology. The entire theory\nof Baur is evolved out of Peter's blunder. Let it be granted that\nPeter in yielding to the \"certain from James\" followed his genuine\nconvictions and the tradition of Jewish Christianity, and we see at\nonce how deep a gulf lay between Paul and the Primitive Church. All\nthat Paul argues in the subsequent discussion only tends, in this\ncase, to make the breach more visible. This false step of Peter is\nthe thing that chiefly lends a colour to the theory in question, with\nall the far-reaching consequences touching the origin and import of\nChristianity, which it involves. So long \"the evil that men do lives\nafter them\"!\n\nPaul's rebuke of his brother Apostle extends to the conclusion of the\nchapter. Some interpreters cut it short at the end of ver. 14; others\nat ver. 16; others again at ver. 18. But the address is consecutive\nand germane to the occasion throughout. Paul does not, to be sure,\ngive a verbatim report, but the substance of what he said, and in a\nform suited to his readers. The narrative is an admirable prelude\nto the argument of chap. iii. It forms the transition from the\nhistorical to the polemical part of the Epistle, from the Apostle's\npersonal to his doctrinal apology. The condensed form of the speech\nmakes its interpretation difficult and much contested. We shall in\nthe remainder of this Chapter trace the general course of Paul's\nreproof, proposing in the following Chapter to deal more fully with\nits doctrinal contents.\n\nI. In the first place, _Paul taxes the Jewish Apostle with\ninsincerity and unfaithfulness toward the gospel_. \"I saw,\" he says,\n\"that they were not holding a straight course, according to the truth\nof the gospel.\"\n\nIt is a _moral_, not a doctrinal aberration, that Paul lays at the\ndoor of Cephas and Barnabas. They did not hold a different creed\nfrom himself; they were disloyal to the common creed. They swerved\nfrom the path of rectitude in which they had walked hitherto. They\nhad regard no longer to \"the truth of the gospel\"--the supreme\nconsideration of the servant of Christ--but to the favour of men, to\nthe public opinion of Jerusalem. \"What will be said of us _there_?\"\nthey whispered to each other, \"if these messengers of James report\nthat we are discarding the sacred customs, and making no difference\nbetween Jew and Gentile? We shall alienate our Judean brethren. We\nshall bring a scandal on the Christian cause in the eyes of Judaism.\"\n\nThis withdrawal of the Jews from the common fellowship at Antioch\nwas a public matter. It was an injury to the whole Gentile-Christian\ncommunity. If the reproof was to be salutary, it must be equally\npublic and explicit. The offence was notorious. Every one deplored\nit, except those who shared it, or profited by it. Cephas \"stood\ncondemned.\" And yet his influence and the reverence felt toward\nhim were so great, that no one dared to put this condemnation into\nwords. His sanction was of itself enough to give to this sudden\nrecrudescence of Jewish bigotry the force of authoritative usage.\n\"The truth of the gospel\" was again in jeopardy. Once more Paul's\nintervention foiled the attempts of the Judaizers and saved Gentile\nliberties. And this time he stood quite alone. Even the faithful\nBarnabas deserted him. But what mattered that, if Christ and truth\nwere on his side? _Amicus Cephas, amicus Barnabas; sed magis amicus\nVeritas._ Solitary amid the circle of opposing or dissembling Jews,\nPaul \"withstood\" the chief of the Apostles of Jesus \"to the face.\" He\nrebuked him \"before them all.\"\n\nII. Peter's conduct is reproved by Paul _in the light of their common\nknowledge of salvation in Christ_.\n\nPaul is not content with pointing out the inconsistency of his\nbrother Apostle. He must probe the matter to the bottom. He will\nbring Peter's delinquency to the touchstone of the Gospel, in its\nfundamental principles. So he passes in ver. 15 from the outward to\nthe inward, from the circumstances of Peter's conduct to the inner\nworld of spiritual consciousness, in which his offence finds its\ndeeper condemnation. \"You and I,\" he goes on to say, \"not Gentile\nsinners, but men of Jewish birth--yet for all that, knowing that\nthere is no justification for man in works of law, only[53] through\nfaith in Christ--we too put our faith in Christ, in order to be\njustified by faith in Him, not by works of law; for as Scripture\ntaught us, in that way no flesh will be justified.\"\n\n [53] \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 has the same partially exceptive force as \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 in\n ch. i. 7, 19. Comp. Rom. xiv. 14; also Luke iv. 26, 27.\n\nPaul makes no doubt that the Jewish Apostle's experience of salvation\ncorresponded with his own. Doubtless, in their previous intercourse,\nand especially when he first \"made acquaintance with Cephas\" (ch. i.\n18) in Jerusalem, the hearts of the two men had been opened to each\nother; and they had found that, although brought to the knowledge of\nthe truth in different ways, yet in the essence of the matter--in\nrespect of the personal conviction of sin, in the yielding up of\nself-righteousness and native pride, in the abandonment of every prop\nand trust but Jesus Christ--their history had run the same course,\nand face answered to face. Yes, Paul knew that he had an ally in the\nheart of his friend. He was not fighting as one that beateth the\nair, not making a rhetorical flourish, or a parade of some favourite\ndoctrine of his own; he appealed from Peter dissembling to Peter\nfaithful and consistent. Peter's dissimulation was a return to\nthe Judaic ground of legal righteousness. By refusing to eat with\nuncircumcised men, he affirmed implicitly that, though believers in\nChrist, they were still to him \"common and unclean,\" that the Mosaic\nrites imparted a higher sanctity than the righteousness of faith. Now\nthe principles of evangelical and legal righteousness, of salvation\nby faith and by law-works, are diametrically opposed. It is logically\nimpossible to maintain both. Peter had long ago accepted the former\ndoctrine. He had sought salvation, just like any Gentile sinner, on\nthe common ground of human guilt, and with a faith that renounced\nevery consideration of Jewish privilege and legal performance.\nBy what right can any Hebrew believer in Christ, after this, set\nhimself above his Gentile brother, or presume to be by virtue of his\ncircumcision and ritual law-keeping a holier man? Such we take to be\nthe import of Paul's challenge in vv. 15, 16.\n\nIII. Paul is met at this point by the stock objection to the doctrine\nof salvation by faith--an objection brought forward in the dispute\nat Antioch not, we should imagine, by Peter himself, but by the\nJudaistic advocates. _To renounce legal righteousness was in effect_,\nthey urged, _to promote sin--nay, to make Christ Himself a minister\nof sin_ (ver. 17).\n\nPaul retorts the charge on those who make it. _They promote sin_,\nhe declares, _who set up legal righteousness again_ (ver. 18). The\nobjection is stated and met in the form of question and answer, as\nin Rom. iii. 5. We have in this sharp thrust and parry an example\nof the sort of fence which Paul must often have carried on in his\ndiscussions with Jewish opponents on these questions.\n\nWe must not overlook the close verbal connection of these verses with\nthe two last. The phrase \"seeking to be justified in Christ\" carries\nus back to the time when the two Apostles, self-condemned sinners,\nseverally sought and found a new ground of righteousness in Him. Now\nwhen Peter and Paul did this, they were \"themselves also found[54]\nto be sinners,\"--an experience how abasing to their Jewish pride!\nThey made the great discovery that stripped them of legal merit, and\nbrought them down in their own esteem to the level of common sinners.\nPeter's confession may stand for both, when he said, abashed by the\nglory of Christ, \"Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.\" Now\nthis style of penitence, this profound self-abasement in the presence\nof Jesus Christ, revolted the Jewish moralist. To Pharisaic sentiment\nit was contemptible. If justification by faith requires this, if\nit brings the Jew to so abject a posture and makes no difference\nbetween lawless and law-keeping, between pious children of Abraham\nand heathen outcasts--if this be the doctrine of Christ, all moral\ndistinctions are confounded, and Christ is \"a minister of sin!\" This\nteaching robs the Jew of the righteousness he before possessed; it\ntakes from him the benefit and honour that God bestowed upon his\nrace! So, we doubt not, many a Jew was heard angrily exclaiming\nagainst the Pauline doctrine, both at Antioch and elsewhere. This\nconclusion was, in the view of the Legalist, a _reductio ad absurdum_\nof Paulinism.\n\n [54] For this emphatic _found_, describing a process of moral\n conviction and inward discovery, comp. Rom. vii. 10, 18, 21; the\n whole passage strikingly illustrates the reminiscence of our text.\n\nThe Apostle repels this inference with the indignant \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf, _Far\nbe it!_ His reply is indicated by the very form in which he puts the\nquestion: \"If we were _found_ sinners\" (Christ did not _make_ us\nsuch). \"The complaint was this,\" as Calvin finely says: \"Has Christ\ntherefore come to take away from us the righteousness of the Law,\nto make us polluted who were holy? Nay, Paul says;--he repels the\nblasphemy with detestation. For Christ did not introduce sin, but\nrevealed it. He did not rob them of righteousness, but of the false\nshow thereof.\"[55] The reproach of the Judaizers was in reality the\nsame that is urged against evangelical doctrine still--that it is\n_immoral_, placing the virtuous and vicious in the common category of\n\"sinners.\"\n\n [55] _Commentarii_, _in loc._\n\nVer. 18 throws back the charge of promoting sin upon the Legalist.\nIt is the counterpart, not of ver. 19, but rather of ver. 17. The\n\"transgressor\" is the sinner in a heightened and more specific\nsense, one who breaks known and admitted law.[56] This word bears,\nin Paul's vocabulary, a precise and strongly marked signification\nwhich is not satisfied by the common interpretation. It is not that\nPeter in setting up the Law which he had in principle overthrown,\n_puts himself in the wrong_; nor that Peter in re-establishing\nthe Law, _contradicts the purpose of the Law itself_ (Chrysostom,\nLightfoot, Beet). This is to anticipate the next verse. In Paul's\nview and according to the experience common to Peter with himself,\nlaw and transgression are concomitant, every man \"under law\" is _ipso\nfacto_ a transgressor. He who sets up the first, constitutes himself\nthe second. And this is what Peter is now doing; although Paul\ncourteously veils the fact by putting it hypothetically, in the first\nperson.[57] After dissolving, so far as in him lay, the validity of\nlegal righteousness and breaking down the edifice of justification by\nworks, Peter is now building it up again, and thereby constructing a\nprison-house for himself. _Returning to legal allegiance, he returns\nto legal condemnation_;[58] with his own hands he puts on his neck\nthe burden of the Law's curse, which through faith in Christ he had\ncast off. By this act of timid conformity he seeks to commend himself\nto Jewish opinion; but it only serves, in the light of the Gospel,\nto \"prove him a transgressor,\" to \"commend\"[59] him in that unhappy\ncharacter. This is Paul's retort to the imputation of the Judaist. It\ncarries the war into the enemies' camp. \"No,\" says Paul, \"_Christ_ is\nno patron of sin, in bidding men renounce legal righteousness. But\nthose promote sin--in themselves first of all--who after knowing His\nrighteousness, turn back again to legalism.\"\n\n [56] See Grimm's _Lexicon_, or Trench's _N. T. Synonyms_, on this\n word. Comp. ch. iii. 19; Rom. ii. 23-27; iv. 15; v. 14.\n\n [57] The _I_ of this sentence is quite indefinite. On the other\n hand ver. 19, with its emphatic \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1, brings us into a new\n vein of thought.\n\n [58] Comp. ch. iii. 10-12, 19; Rom. iii. 20; iv. 15.\n\n [59] This verb has, as Schott suggests, a tinge of irony.\n\nIV. The conviction of Peter is now complete. From the sad bondage to\nwhich the Jewish Apostle, by his compliance with the Judaizers, was\npreparing to submit himself, _the Apostle turns to his own joyous\nsense of deliverance_ (vv. 19-21). Those who resort to legalism, he\nhas said, ensure their own condemnation. It is, on the other hand,\nby an entire surrender to Christ, by realizing the import of His\ndeath, that we learn to \"live unto God.\" So Paul had proved it. At\nthis moment he is conscious of a union with the crucified and living\nSaviour, which lifts him above the curse of the law, above the\npower of sin. To revert to the Judaistic state, to dream any more\nof earning righteousness by legal conformity, is a thing for him\ninconceivable. It would be to make void the cross of Christ!\n\nAnd it was the Law itself that first impelled Paul along this\npath. \"Through law\" he \"died to law.\" The Law drove him from itself\nto seek salvation in Jesus Christ. Its accusations allowed him no\nshelter, left him no secure spot on which to build the edifice of\nhis self-righteousness. It said to him unceasingly, Thou art a\ntransgressor.[60] He who seeks justification by its means contradicts\nthe Law, while he frustrates the grace of God.\n\n [60] Rom. vii. 7-viii. 1.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n_THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE._\n\n \"For I through law died unto law, that I might live unto God. I\n have been crucified with Christ; and _it is_ no longer I _that_\n live, but Christ liveth in me: and that _life_ which I now live\n in the flesh I live in faith, _the faith_ which is in the Son\n of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me. I do not make\n void the grace of God: for if righteousness is through law, then\n Christ died for nought\"--GAL. ii. 19-21.\n\n\nPaul's personal apology is ended. He has proved his Apostolic\nindependence, and made good his declaration, \"My Gospel is not\naccording to man.\" If he owed his commission to any man, it was to\nPeter; so his traducers persistently alleged. He has shown that,\nfirst _without_ Peter, then _in equality with_ Peter, and finally\n_in spite of_ Peter, he had received and maintained it. Similarly in\nregard to James and the Jerusalem Church. Without their mediation\nPaul commenced his work; when that work was challenged, they could\nonly approve it; and when afterwards men professing to act in their\nname disturbed his work, the Apostle had repelled them. He acted all\nalong under the consciousness of a trust in the gospel committed to\nhim directly by Jesus Christ, and an authority in its administration\nsecond to none upon earth. And events had justified this confidence.\n\nPaul is compelled to say all this about himself. The vindication of\nhis ministry is forced from him by the calumnies of false brethren.\nFrom the time of the conference at Jerusalem, and still more since he\nwithstood Peter at Antioch, he had been a mark for the hatred of the\nJudaizing faction. He was the chief obstacle to their success. Twice\nhe had foiled them, when they counted upon victory. They had now set\non foot a systematic agitation against him, with its head-quarters\nat Jerusalem, carried on under some pretext of sanction from the\nauthorities of the Church there. At Corinth and in Galatia the\nlegalist emissaries had appeared simultaneously; they pursued in the\nmain the same policy, adapting it to the character and disposition of\nthe two Churches, and appealing with no little success to the Jewish\npredilections common even amongst Gentile believers in Christ.\n\nIn this controversy Paul and the gospel he preached were bound\ntogether. \"I am set,\" he says, \"for the defence of the gospel\" (Ph.\ni. 16). He was the champion of the cross, the impersonation of the\nprinciple of salvation by faith. It is \"the gospel of Christ,\" the\n\"truth of the gospel,\" he reiterates, that is at stake. If he wards\noff blows falling upon him, it is because they are aimed through\nhim at the truth for which he lives--nay, at Christ who lives in\nhim. In his self-assertion there is no note of pride or personal\nanxiety. Never was there a man more completely lost in the greatness\nof a great cause, nor who felt himself in comparison with it more\nworthless. But that cause has lifted Paul with it to imperishable\nglory. Of all names named on earth, none stands nearer than his to\nthat which is \"above every name.\"\n\nWhile Paul in ch. i. and ii. is busy with his own vindication, he\nis meantime behind the personal defence preparing the doctrinal\nargument. His address to Peter is an incisive outline of the gospel\nof grace. The three closing verses--the \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u1f94 in\nparticular--are the heart of Paul's theology--_summa ac medulla\nChristianismi_ (Bengel). Such a testimony was the Apostle's best\ndefence before his audience at Antioch; it was the surest means of\ntouching the heart of Peter and convincing him of his error. And its\nrecital was admirably calculated to enlighten the Galatians as to the\ntrue bearing of this dispute which had been so much misrepresented.\nFrom ver. 15 onwards, Paul has been all the while addressing, under\nthe person of Peter, the conscience of his readers,[61] and paving\nthe way for the assault that he makes upon them with so much vigour\nin the first verses of ch. iii. Read in the light of the foregoing\nnarrative, this passage is a compendium of the Pauline Gospel,\ninvested with the peculiar interest that belongs to a confession of\npersonal faith, made at a signal crisis in the author's life. Let us\nexamine this momentous declaration.\n\n [61] Hofmann is so far right when he makes the Apostle turn to\n the Galatians in ch. ii. 15, and draws at this point the line\n between the historical and doctrinal sections of the Epistle.\n\nI. At the foundation of Paul's theology lies his conception of _the\ngrace of God_.\n\nGRACE is the Apostle's watchword. The word occurs twice as often in\nhis Epistles as it does in the rest of the New Testament. Outside\nthe Pauline Luke and Hebrews, and 1 Peter with its large infusion of\nPaulinism, it is exceedingly rare.[62] In this word the character,\nspirit, and aim of the revelation of Christ, as Paul understood\nit, are summed up. \"The grace of God\" is the touchstone to which\nPeter's dissimulation is finally brought. _Christ_ is the embodiment\nof Divine grace--above all, in His death. So that it is one and the\nsame thing to \"bring to nought the grace of God,\" and \"the death of\nChrist.\" Hence God's grace is called \"the grace of Christ,\"--\"of our\nLord Jesus Christ.\" From Romans to Titus and Philemon, \"grace reigns\"\nin every Epistle. No one can counterfeit this mark of Paul, or speak\nof grace in his style and accent.\n\n [62] What is said of \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2, applies also to its derivatives,\n \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.\n\nGod's grace is not His love alone; it is _redeeming love_--love\npoured out upon the undeserving, love coming to seek and save\nthe lost, \"bringing salvation to all men\" (Rom. v. 1-8; Tit. ii.\n11). Grace decreed redemption, made the sacrifice, proclaims the\nreconciliation, provides and bestows the new sonship of the Spirit,\nand schools its children into all the habits of godliness and virtue\nthat beseem their regenerate life, which it brings finally to its\nconsummation in the life eternal.[63]\n\n [63] Eph. i. 5-9; 2 Tim. i. 9; Rom. iii. 24; Heb. ii. 9; 2 Cor.\n v. 20-vi. 1; Gal. iv. 5; Tit. iii. 5-7; ii. 11-14; Rom. v. 21.\n\nGrace in God is therefore the antithesis of _sin in man_,\ncounterworking and finally triumphing over it. Grace belongs to\nthe last Adam as eminently as sin to the first. The later thoughts\nof the Apostle on this theme are expressed in Tit. iii. 4-7, a\npassage singularly rich in its description of the working of Divine\ngrace on human nature. \"We were senseless,\" he says, \"disobedient,\nwandering in error, in bondage to lusts and pleasures of many kinds,\nliving in envy and malice, hateful, hating each other. But when the\nkindness and love to man of our Saviour God shone forth,\"--then\nall was changed: \"not by works wrought in our own righteousness,\nbut according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of\nregeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, that, justified by His\ngrace, we might be made heirs in hope of life eternal.\" The vision of\nthe grace of God drives stubbornness, lust, and hatred from the soul.\nIt brings about, for man and for society, the _palingenesia_, the new\nbirth of Creation, rolling back the tide of evil and restoring the\ngolden age of peace and innocence; and crowns the joy of a renovated\nearth with the glories of a recovered heaven.\n\nBeing the antagonist of sin, grace comes of necessity into contrast\nwith _the law_. Law is intrinsically the opposer of sin; sin is\n\"lawlessness,\" with Paul as much as with John.[64] But law was\npowerless to cope with sin: it was \"weak through the flesh.\" Instead\nof crushing sin, the interposition of law served to inflame and\nstimulate it, to bring into play its latent energy, reducing the man\nmost loyally disposed to moral despair. \"By the law therefore is the\nknowledge of sin; it worketh out wrath.\" Inevitably, it makes men\ntransgressors; it brings upon them an inward condemnation, a crushing\nsense of the Divine anger and hostility.[65] That is all that law\ncan do by itself. \"Holy and just and good,\" notwithstanding, to our\nperverse nature it becomes _death_ (Rom. vii. 13; 1 Cor. xv. 56).\nIt is actually \"the strength of sin,\" lending itself to extend and\nconfirm its power. We find in it a \"law of sin and death.\" So that\nto be \"under law\" and \"under grace\" are two opposite and mutually\nexclusive states. In the latter condition only is sin \"no longer our\nlord\" (Rom. vi. 14). Peter and the Jews of Antioch therefore, in\nbuilding up the legal principle again, were in truth \"abolishing the\ngrace of God.\" If the Galatians follow their example, Paul warns them\nthat they will \"fall from grace.\" Accepting circumcision, they become\n\"debtors to perform the whole law,\"--and that means transgression and\nthe curse (ch. v. 1-4; iii. 10-12; ii. 16-18).\n\n [64] Rom. vii. 12, 14; 2 Thess. ii. 4-8; comp. 1 John iii. 4.\n\n [65] Rom. iii. 20; iv. 15; v. 20; vii. 5, 24; Gal. ii. 16; iii.\n 10, 11, 19.\n\nWhile sin is the reply which man's nature makes to the demands of\nlaw, _faith_ is the response elicited by grace; it is the door of\nthe heart opening to grace.[66] Grace and Faith go hand in hand, as\nLaw and Transgression. Limiting the domain of faith, Peter virtually\ndenied the sovereignty of grace. He belied his confession made at\nthe Council of Jerusalem: \"By _the grace_ of the Lord Jesus we\n_trust_ to be saved, even as the Gentiles\" (Acts xv. 11). With Law\nare joined such terms as Works, Debt, Reward, Glorying, proper to\na \"righteousness of one's own.\"[67] With Grace we associate Gift,\nPromise, Predestination, Call, Election, Adoption, Inheritance,\nbelonging to the dialect of \"the righteousness which is of God by\nfaith.\"[68] Grace operates in the region of \"the Spirit,\" making for\nfreedom; but law, however spiritual in origin, has come to seek its\naccomplishment in the sphere of the flesh, where it \"gendereth to\nbondage\" (ch. iv. 23-v. 5; 2 Cor. iii. 6, 17).\n\n [66] Rom. iii. 24, 25; Eph. ii. 8; etc.\n\n [67] Rom. iv. 1-4; xi. 6; Gal. ii. 16; iii. 12.\n\n [68] Rom. iv. 16; viii. 28-39; xi. 5; Eph. i. 4-6; Tit. iii. 7;\n Acts xx. 32; Gal. iii. 18: \u03b4\u03b9' \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f41 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nGrace appears, however, in another class of passages in Paul's\nEpistles, of which ch. i. 15, ii. 9 are examples. To the Divine\ngrace Paul ascribes _his personal salvation and Apostolic call_. The\nrevelation which made him a Christian and an Apostle, was above all\nthings a manifestation of grace. Wearing this aspect, \"the glory of\nGod\" appeared to him \"in the face of Jesus Christ.\" The splendour\nthat blinded and overwhelmed Saul on his way to Damascus, was \"the\nglory of His grace.\" The voice of Jesus that fell on the persecutor's\near spoke in the accents of grace. No scourge of the Law, no thunders\nof Sinai, could have smitten down the proud Pharisee, and beaten\nor scorched out of him his strong self-will, like the complaint of\nJesus. All the circumstances tended to stamp upon his soul, fused\ninto penitence in that hour, the ineffaceable impression of \"the\ngrace of God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ.\" Such confessions\nas those of 1 Cor. xv. 8-10, and Eph. ii. 7, iii. 7, 8, show how\nconstantly this remembrance was present with the Apostle Paul and\nsuffused his views of revelation, giving to his ministry its peculiar\ntenderness of humility and ardour of gratitude. This sentiment of\nboundless obligation to the grace of God, with its pervasive effect\nupon the Pauline doctrine, is strikingly expressed in the doxology of\n1 Tim. i. 11-17,--words which it is almost a sacrilege to put into\nthe mouth of a _falsarius_: \"According to the gospel of the glory of\nthe blessed God, wherewith _I_ was intrusted, ... who was aforetime\na blasphemer and persecutor.... But the grace of our Lord abounded\neven more exceedingly. Faithful is the saying, worthy to be received\nof all, 'Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners'--of whom\n_I_ am chief.... In me as chief Christ Jesus showed forth all His\nlong-suffering.... Now to the King of the ages be honour and glory\nfor ever. Amen.\" Who, reading the Apostle's story, does not echo that\n_Amen_? No wonder that Paul became the Apostle of _grace_; even as\nJohn, \"the disciple whom Jesus loved,\" must perforce be the Apostle\nof _love_. First to him was God's grace revealed in its largest\naffluence, that through him it might be known to all men and to all\nages.\n\nII. Side by side with the grace of God, we find in ver. 21 _the death\nof Christ_. He sets aside the former, the Apostle argues, who by\nadmitting legal righteousness nullifies the latter.\n\nWhile grace embodies Paul's fundamental conception of the Divine\ncharacter, the death of Christ is the fundamental fact in which that\ncharacter manifests itself. So the cross becomes the centre of Paul's\ntheology. But it was, in the first place, the basis of his personal\nlife. \"Faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for\nme,\" is the foundation of \"the life he now lives in the flesh.\"\n\nHere lay the stumbling-block of Judaism. Theocratic pride, Pharisaic\ntradition, could not, as we say, _get over_ it. A crucified Messiah!\nHow revolting the bare idea. But when, as in Paul's case, Judaistic\npride did surmount this huge scandal and in spite of the offence of\nthe cross arrive at faith in Jesus, it was at the cost of a severe\nfall. It was broken in pieces,--destroyed once and for ever. With\nthe elder Apostles the change had been more gradual; they were never\nsteeped in Judaism as Saul was. For him to accept the faith of\nJesus was a revolution the most complete and drastic possible. As a\nJudaist, the preaching of the cross was an outrage on his faith and\nhis Messianic hopes; now it was that which most of all subdued and\nentranced him. Its power was extreme, whether to attract or repel.\nThe more he had loathed and mocked at it before, the more he is bound\nhenceforth to exalt the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. A proof of\nthe Divine anger against the Nazarene he had once deemed it; now he\nsees in it the token of God's grace in Him to the whole world.\n\nFor Paul therefore the death of Christ imported the end of Judaism.\n\"I died to law,\" he writes,--\"I am crucified with Christ.\" Once\nunderstanding what this death meant, and realising his own relation\nto it, on every account it was impossible to go back to Legalism. The\ncross barred all return. The law that put Him, the sinless One, to\ndeath, could give no life to sinful men. The Judaism that pronounced\nHis doom, doomed itself. Who would make peace with it over the\nSaviour's blood? From the moment that Paul knew the truth about the\ndeath of Jesus, he had done with Judaism for ever. Henceforth he knew\nnothing--cherished no belief or sentiment, acknowledged no maxim,\nno tradition, which did not conform itself to His death. The world\nto which he had belonged _died_, self-slain, when it slew Him. From\nChrist's grave a new world was rising, for which alone Paul lived.\n\nBut why should the grace of God take expression in a fact so\nappalling as Christ's death? What has _death_ to do with grace?\nIt is the legal penalty of sin. The conjunction of sin and death\npervades the teaching of Scripture, and is a principle fixed in the\nconscience of mankind. Death, as man knows it, is the inevitable\nconsequence and the universal witness of his transgression. He\n\"carries about in his mortality the testimony that God is angry with\nthe wicked every day\" (Augustine). The death of Jesus Christ cannot\nbe taken out of this category. He died a sinner's death. He bore the\npenalty of guilt. The prophetic antecedents of Calvary, the train of\ncircumstances connected with it, His own explanations in chief--are\nall in keeping with this purpose. With amazement we behold the\nSinless \"made sin,\" the Just dying for the unjust. He was \"born of\na woman, born under law\": under law He lived--and _died_. Grace is\nno law-breaker. God must above all things be \"just Himself,\" if He\nis to justify others (Rom. iii. 26). The death of Jesus declares\nit. That sublime sacrifice is, as one might say, the _resultant_\nof grace and law. Grace \"gives Him up for us all;\" it meets the\nlaw's claims in Him, even to the extreme penalty, that from us the\npenalty may be lifted off. He puts Himself under law, in order \"to\n_buy out_ those under law\" (ch. iv. 4, 5). In virtue of the death of\nChrist, therefore, men are dealt with on an extra-legal footing, on\nterms of grace; not because law is ignored or has broken down; but\nbecause it is satisfied beforehand. God has \"set forth Christ Jesus\na propitiation\"; and in view of that accomplished fact, He proceeds\n\"in the present time\" to \"justify him who is of faith in Jesus\"\n(Rom. iii. 22-26). Legalism is at an end, for the Law has spent\nitself on our Redeemer. For those that are in Him \"there is now no\ncondemnation.\" This is to anticipate the fuller teaching of ch. iii.;\nbut the vicarious sacrifice is already implied when Paul says, \"He\ngave Himself up for me--gave Himself for our sins\" (ch. i. 4).\n\nThe _resurrection of Christ_ is, in Paul's thought, the other side of\nHis death. They constitute one event, the obverse and reverse of the\nsame reality. For Paul, as for the first Apostles, the resurrection\nof Jesus gave to His death an aspect wholly different from that it\npreviously wore. But the transformation wrought in their minds during\nthe \"forty days,\" in his case came about in a single moment, and\nbegan from a different starting-point. Instead of being the merited\npunishment of a blasphemer and false Messiah, the death of Calvary\nbecame the glorious self-sacrifice of the Son of God. The dying\nand rising of Jesus were blended in the Apostle's mind; he always\nsees the one in the light of the other. The faith that saves, as he\nformulates it, is at once a faith that Christ died for our sins, and\nthat God raised Him from the dead on the third day.[69] Whichever\nof the two one may first apprehend, it brings the other along with\nit. The resurrection is not an express topic of this Epistle.\nNevertheless it meets us in its first sentence, where we discern\nthat Paul's knowledge of the gospel and his call to proclaim it,\nrested upon this fact. In the passage before us the resurrection is\nmanifestly assumed. If the Apostle is \"crucified with Christ,\"--and\nyet \"Christ _lives_ in him,\" it is not simply the teaching, or the\nmission of Jesus that lives over again in Paul; the _life_ of the\nrisen Saviour has itself entered into his soul.\n\n [69] 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4, 11; Rom. iv. 24, 25; x. 9; 1 Thess. iv. 14.\n\nIII. This brings us to the thought of _the union of the believer with\nChrist in death and life_, which is expressed in terms of peculiar\nemphasis and distinctness in ver. 20. \"With Christ I have been\ncrucified; and _I_ live no longer; it is Christ that lives in me. My\nearthly life is governed by faith in Him who loved me and died for\nme.\" Christ and Paul are one. When Christ died, Paul's former self\ndied with Him. Now it is the Spirit of Christ in heaven that lives\nwithin Paul's body here on earth.\n\nThis union is first of all _a communion with the dying Saviour_.\nPaul does not think of the sacrifice of Calvary as something merely\naccomplished _for_ him, outside himself, by a legal arrangement\nin which one person takes the place of another and, as it were,\n_personates_ him. The nexus between Christ and Paul is deeper than\nthis. Christ is the centre and soul of the race, holding towards it\na spiritual primacy of which Adam's natural headship was a type,\nmediating between men and God in all the relations which mankind\nholds to God.[70] The death of Jesus was more than substitutionary;\nit was representative. He had every right to act for us. He was the\n\"One\" who alone could \"die for all;\" in Him \"all died\" (2 Cor. v. 14,\n15). He carried us with Him to the cross; His death was in effect the\ndeath of those who sins He bore. There was no legal fiction here; no\nfederal compact extemporised for the occasion. \"The second Man from\nheaven,\" if second in order of time, was first and fundamental in the\nspiritual order, the organic Head of mankind, \"the root,\" as well as\n\"the offspring\" of humanity.[71] The judgement that fell upon the\nrace was a summons to Him who held in His hands its interests and\ndestinies. Paul's faith apprehends and endorses what Christ has done\non his behalf,--\"who loved me,\" he cries, \"and gave Himself up _for\nme_.\" When the Apostle says, \"I _have been_ crucified with Christ,\"\nhe goes back in thought to the scene of Calvary; there, potentially,\nall that was done of which he now realises in himself the issue. His\npresent salvation is, so to speak, a _rehearsal_ of the Saviour's\ndeath, a \"likeness\" (Rom. vi. 5) of the supreme act of atonement,\nwhich took place once for all when Christ died for our sins.\n\n [70] Rom. v. 14; 1 Cor. xv. 22, 45-48; 1 Tim. ii. 5.\n\n [71] 1 Cor. xv. 45-49; comp. Col. i. 15-17; John i. 4, 9, 15, 16.\n\n_Faith_ is the link between the past, objective sacrifice, and the\npresent, subjective apprehension of it, by which its virtue becomes\nour own. Without such faith, Christ would have \"died in vain.\" His\ndeath must then have been a great sacrifice thrown away. Wilful\nunbelief repudiates what the Redeemer has done, provisionally, on\nour behalf. This repudiation, as individuals, we are perfectly free\nto make. \"The objective reconciliation effected in Christ's death\ncan after all benefit actually, in their own personal consciousness,\nonly those who know and acknowledge it, and feel themselves in their\nsolidarity with Christ to be so much one with Him as to be able\nto appropriate inwardly His death and celestial life, and to live\nover again His life and death; those only, in a word, who truly\n_believe_ in Christ. Thus the idea of substitution in Paul receives\nits complement and realisation in the mysticism of his conception\nof faith. While Christ objectively represents the whole race, that\nrelation becomes a subjective reality only in the case of those\nwho connect themselves with Him in faith in such a way as to fuse\ntogether with Him into _one_ spirit and _one_ body, as to find in\nHim their Head, their soul, their life and self, and He in them His\nbody, His members and His temple. Thereby the idea of 'one for all'\nreceives the stricter meaning of 'all in and with one.'\"[72]\n\n [72] Pfleiderer, _Hibbert Lectures_, pp. 65, 6. Dr. Pfleiderer's\n delicate and sympathetic interpretation of Paul's teaching (in\n these _Lectures_, and still more in his _Paulinism_) has made\n all students of the Apostle his debtors, however much they may\n quarrel with his historical criticism.\n\nPartaking the death of Christ, Paul has come to share in _His risen\nlife_. On the cross he owned his Saviour--owned His wounds, His\nshame, His agony of death, and felt himself therein shamed, wounded,\nslain to death. Thus joined to his Redeemer, as by the nails that\nfastened Him to the tree, Paul is carried with Him down into the\ngrave--into the grave, and out again! Christ is risen from the dead:\nso therefore is Paul. He \"died to sin once,\" and now \"liveth to God;\ndeath lords it over Him no more:\" this Paul reckons equally true for\nhimself (Rom. vi. 3-11). The _Ego_, the \"old man\" that Paul once was,\nlies buried in the grave of Jesus.\n\nJesus Christ alone, \"the Lord of the Spirit\" has risen from that\nsepulchre,--has risen in the spirit of Paul. \"If any one should\ncome to Paul's doors and ask, Who lives here? he would answer, Not\nSaul of Tarsus, but Jesus Christ lives in this body of mine.\" In\nthis appropriation of the death and rising of the Lord Jesus, this\ninterpenetration of the spirit of Paul and that of Christ, there are\nthree stages corresponding to the Friday, Saturday, and Sunday of\nEastertide. \"Christ died for our sins; He was buried; He rose again\nthe third day:\" so, by consequence, \"I am crucified with Christ; no\nlonger do I live; Christ liveth in me.\"\n\nThis mystic union of the soul and its Saviour bears fruit in\nthe activities of outward life. Faith is no mere abstract and\ncontemplative affection; but a working energy, dominating and\ndirecting all our human faculties. It makes even the flesh its\ninstrument, which defied the law of God, and betrayed the man to\nthe bondage of sin and death. There is a note of triumph in the\nwords,--\"the life I now live _in the flesh_, I live in faith!\" The\nimpossible has been accomplished. \"The body of death\" is possessed by\nthe Spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Rom. vi. 12; vii. 23-viii. 1).\nThe flesh--the despair of the law--has become the sanctified vessel\nof grace.\n\nPaul's entire theology of Redemption is contained in this mystery of\nunion with Christ. The office of _the Holy Spirit_, whose communion\nholds together the glorified Lord and His members upon earth, is\nimplied in the teaching of ver. 20. This is manifest, when in ch.\niii. 2-5 we find the believer's union with Christ described as\n\"receiving the Spirit, beginning in the Spirit;\" and when a little\nlater \"the promise of the Spirit\" embraces the essential blessings\nof the new life.[73] The doctrine of _the Church_ is also here. For\nthose in whom Christ dwells have therein a common life, which knows\nno \"Jew and Greek; all are one man\" in Him.[74] _Justification_ and\n_sanctification_ alike are here; the former being the realisation\nof our share in Christ's propitiation for sin, the latter our\nparticipation in His risen life, spent \"to God.\" Finally, _the\nresurrection to eternal life_ and _the heavenly glory_ of the saints\nspring from their present fellowship with the Redeemer. \"The Spirit\nthat raised Jesus from the dead, dwelling in us, shall raise our\nmortal body\" to share with the perfected spirit His celestial life.\nThe resurrection of Christ is the earnest of that which all His\nmembers will attain,--nay, the material creation is to participate\nin the glory of the sons of God, made like to Him, the \"firstborn of\nmany brethren\" (Rom. viii. 11, 16-23, 29, 30; Phil. iii. 20, 21).\n\n [73] Ch. iii. 14; iv. 6, 7; v. 5; 1 Cor., vi. 17, 19; Rom. viii.\n 9-16.\n\n [74] Ch. iii. 28; Col. iii. 11; Rom. xv. 5-7.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIn all these vital truths Paul's gospel was traversed by the\nLegalism countenanced by Peter at Antioch. _The Judaistic doctrine\nstruck_ directly, if not avowedly, _at the cross_, whose reproach\nits promoters sought to escape. This charge is the climax of the\nApostle's contention against Peter, and the starting-point of his\nexpostulation with the Galatians in the following chapter. \"If\nrighteousness could be obtained by way of law, then Christ died\nfor nought!\" What could one say worse of any doctrine or policy,\nthan that it led to this? And if works of law actually justify men,\nand circumcision is allowed to make a difference between Jew and\nGreek before God, the principle of legalism is admitted, and the\nintolerable consequence ensues which Paul denounces. What did Christ\ndie for, if men are able to redeem themselves after this fashion? How\ncan any one dare to build up in face of the cross his paltry edifice\nof self-wrought goodness, and say by doing so that the expiation\nof Calvary was superfluous and that Jesus Christ might have spared\nHimself all that trouble!\n\nAnd so, on the one hand, Legalism _impugns the grace of God_. It\nputs human relations to God on the footing of a debtor and creditor\naccount; it claims for man a ground for boasting in himself (Rom. iv.\n1-4), and takes from God the glory of His grace. In its devotion to\nstatute and ordinance, it misses the soul of obedience--the love of\nGod, only to be awakened by the knowledge of His love to us (ch. v.\n14; 1 John iv. 7-11). It sacrifices the Father in God to the King. It\nforgets that trust is the first duty of a rational creature toward\nhis Maker, that the law of faith lies at the basis of all law for man.\n\nOn the other hand, and by the same necessity, Legalism is _fatal to\nthe spiritual life in man_. Whilst it clouds the Divine character,\nit dwarfs and petrifies the human. What becomes of the sublime\nmystery of the life hid with Christ in God, if its existence is made\ncontingent on circumcision and ritual performance? To men who put\n\"meat and drink\" on a level with \"righteousness and peace and joy\nin the Holy Ghost,\" or in their intercourse with fellow-Christians\nset points of ceremony above justice, mercy, and faith, the very\nidea of a spiritual kingdom of God is wanting. The religion of Jesus\nand of Paul regenerates the heart, and from that centre regulates\nand hallows the whole ongoing of life. Legalism guards the mouth,\nthe hands, the senses, and imagines that through these it can drill\nthe man into the Divine order. The latter theory makes religion a\nmechanical system; the former conceives it as an inward, organic\nlife.\n\n\n\n\n _THE DOCTRINAL POLEMIC._\n\n CHAP. iii. 1-v. 12.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\n_THE GALATIAN FOLLY._\n\n \"O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes\n Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified? This only would I\n learn from you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law,\n or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in\n the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the flesh? Did ye suffer\n so many things in vain? if it be indeed in vain. He therefore\n that supplieth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among\n you, _doeth he it_ by the works of the law, or by the hearing of\n faith?\"--GAL. iii. 1-5.\n\n\nAt the beginning of ch. iii. falls the most marked division of this\nEpistle. So far, since the exordium, its course has been strictly\nnarrative. The Apostle has been \"giving\" his readers \"to know\" many\nthings concerning himself and his relations to the Judean Church of\nwhich they had been ignorant or misinformed. Now this preliminary\ntask is over. From explanation and defence he passes suddenly to the\nattack. He turns sharply round upon the Galatians, and begins to ply\nthem with expostulation and argument. It is for their sake that Paul\nhas been telling this story of his past career. In the light of the\nnarration just concluded, they will be able to see their folly and to\nunderstand how much they have been deceived.\n\nHere also the indignation so powerfully expressed in the\nIntroduction, breaks forth again, directed this time, however,\nagainst the Galatians themselves and breathing grief more than anger.\nAnd just as after that former outburst the letter settled down into\nthe sober flow of narrative, so from these words of reproach Paul\npasses on to the measured course of argument which he pursues through\nthe next two chapters. In ch. iv. 8-20, and again in ch. v. 1-12,\ndoctrine gives way to appeal and warning. But these paragraphs still\nbelong to the polemical division of the Epistle, extending from this\npoint to the middle of ch. v. This section forms the central and\nprincipal part of the letter, and is complete in itself. Its last\nwords, in ch. v. 6-12, will bring us round to the position from which\nwe are now setting out.\n\nThis chapter stands, nevertheless, in close connection of thought\nwith the foregoing. The Apostle's doctrine is grounded in historical\nfact and personal experience. The theological argument has behind\nit the weight of his proved Apostleship. The Judaistic dispute at\nAntioch, in particular, bears immediately on the subject-matter of\nthe third chapter. Peter's vacillation had its counterpart in the\ndefection of the Galatians. The reproof and refutation which the\nelder Apostle brought upon himself, Paul's readers must have felt,\ntouched them very nearly. In the crafty intriguers who made mischief\nat Antioch, they could see the image of the Judaists who had come\ninto their midst. Above all, it was _the cross_ which Cephas had\ndishonoured, whose efficacy he had virtually denied. His act of\ndissimulation, pushed to its issue, nullified the death of Christ.\nThis is the gravamen of Paul's impeachment. And it is the foundation\nof all his complaints against the Galatians. Round this centre the\nconflict is waged. By its tendency to enhance or diminish the glory\nof the Saviour's cross, Paul judges of the truth of every teaching,\nthe worth of every policy. Angel or Apostle, it matters not--whoever\ndisparages the cross of Jesus Christ finds in Paul an unflinching\nenemy. The thought of Christ \"dying in vain\" rouses in him the strong\nemotion under which he indites the first verses of this chapter.\nWhat greater folly, what stranger bewitchment can there be, than for\none who has seen \"Jesus Christ crucified\" to turn away to some other\nspectacle, to seek elsewhere a more potent and diviner charm! \"O\nsenseless Galatians!\"\n\nI. Here then was the beginning of their folly. _The Galatians forgot\ntheir Saviour's cross._\n\nThis was the first step in their backsliding. Had their eyes\ncontinued to be fixed on Calvary, the Legalists would have argued and\ncajoled in vain. Let the cross of Christ once lose its spell for us,\nlet its influence fail to hold and rule the soul, and we are at the\nmercy of every wind of doctrine. We are like sailors in a dark night\non a perilous coast, who have lost sight of the lighthouse beacon.\nOur Christianity will go to pieces. If Christ crucified should cease\nto be its sovereign attraction, from that moment the Church is doomed.\n\nThis forgetfulness of the cross on the part of the Galatians is\nthe more astonishing to Paul, because at first they had so vividly\nrealised its power, and the scene of Calvary, as Paul depicted\nit,[75] had taken hold of their nature with extraordinary force. He\nwas conscious at the time--so his words seem to intimate--that it\nwas given him, amongst this susceptible people, to draw the picture\nwith unwonted effect. The gaze of his hearers was rivetted upon the\nsight. It was as if the Lord Jesus hung there before their eyes.\nThey beheld the Divine sufferer. They heard His cries of distress\nand of triumph. They felt the load which crushed Him. Nor was it\ntheir sympathies alone and their reverence, to which the spectacle\nappealed. It stirred their conscience to its depths. It awakened\nfeelings of inward humiliation and contrition, of horror at the curse\nof sin, of anguish under the bitterness and blackness of its death.\n\"It was _you_,\" Paul would say--\"you and I, for whom He died. _Our_\nsins laid on Him that ignominy, those agonies of body and of spirit.\nHe died the Just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.\" They\nlooked, they listened, till their hearts were broken, till all their\nsins cried out against them; and in a passion of repentance they cast\nthemselves before the Crucified, and took Him for their Christ and\nKing. From the foot of the cross they rose new men, with heaven's\nlight upon their brow, with the cry _Abba, Father_ rising from their\nlips, with the Spirit of God and of Jesus Christ, the consciousness\nof a Divine sonship, filling their breast.\n\n [75] The verb \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7 (_openly set forth_) probably means\n _painted up_ rather than _placarded_. This more vivid meaning\n belongs to \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03c9, and there is no sufficient reason why it should\n not attach to \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf-\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03c9. It is entirely in place here. \"Jesus\n Christ crucified\" is not an announcement to be made, but an\n object to be delineated.\n\nHas all this passed away? Have the Galatians forgotten the shame,\nthe glory of that hour--the tears of penitence, the cries of joy and\ngratitude which the vision of the cross drew from their souls, the\nnew creation it had wrought within them, the ardour of spirit and\nhigh resolve with which they pledged themselves to Christ's service?\nWas the influence of that transforming experience to prove no more\nenduring than the morning cloud and early dew? Foolish Galatians!\nHad they not the wit to see that the teaching of the Legalists ran\ncounter to all they had then experienced, that it \"made the death\nof Christ of none effect,\" which had so mighty and saving an effect\nupon themselves? Were they \"so senseless,\" so bereft of reason\nand recollection? The Apostle is amazed. He cannot understand how\nimpressions so powerful should prove so transient, and that truths\nthus clearly perceived and realised should come to be forgotten. Some\nfatal spell has been cast over them. They are \"bewitched\" to act as\nthey are doing. A deadly fascination, like that of the \"evil eye,\"\nhas paralyzed their minds.\n\nThe ancient belief alluded to in the word the Apostle uses here,[76]\nis not altogether a superstition. The malignity that darts out in the\nglance of the \"evil eye\" is a presage of mischief. Not without reason\ndoes it cause a shudder. It is the sign of a demonic jealousy and\nhate. \"Satan has entered into\" the soul which emits it, as once into\nJudas. Behind the spite of the Jewish false brethren Paul recognised\na preternatural malice and cunning, like that with which \"the Serpent\nbeguiled Eve.\"[77] To this darker source of the fascination his\nquestion, \"Who hath bewitched you?\" appears to point.\n\n [76] On \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9 see the note in Lightfoot's Commentary _in\n loc._; also Grimm's N. T. Lexicon. \"The Scripture calleth envy\n an 'evil eye;' ... so there still seemeth to be acknowledged in\n the act of envy an ejaculation or irradiation of the eye. Envy\n hath in it something of witchcraft.... It is the proper attribute\n of the Devil, who is called 'The envious man, that soweth tares\n among the wheat by night.'\"--(Lord Bacon: _Essay_ ix.)\n\n [77] Comp. 2 Cor. xi. 1-4, a passage closely parallel to this\n context, containing what is expressed here and in Gal. i. 6, 7;\n iv. 11, 17, 18.\n\nII. Losing sight of the cross of Christ, the Galatians were\nfurthermore _rejecting the Holy Spirit of God_.\n\nThis heavy reproach the Apostles urges upon his readers through\nthe rest of the paragraph, pausing only for a moment in ver. 4 to\nrecall their earlier sufferings for Christ's sake in further witness\nagainst them. \"I have but one question to put to you,\" he says--\"You\nreceived the Spirit: how did that come about? Was it through what\nyou _did_ according to law? or what you _heard_ in faith? You know\nwell that this great blessing was given to your _faith_. Can you\nexpect to retain this gift of God on other terms than those on which\nyou received it? Have you begun with the Spirit to be brought to\nperfection by the flesh? (ver. 3).... Nay, God still bestows on you\nHis Spirit, with gifts of miraculous energy; and I ask again, whether\nthese displays attend on the practice of law-works, or upon faith's\nhearing?\" (ver. 5).\n\nThe Apostle wished the Galatians to test the competing doctrines\nby their effects. The Spirit of God had put His seal on the\nApostle's teaching, and on the faith of his hearers. Did any such\nmanifestation accompany the preaching of the Legalist? That is all\nhe wants to know. His cause must stand or fall by \"the demonstration\nof the Spirit.\" By \"signs and wonders,\" and diverse gifts of the\nHoly Spirit, God was wont to \"bear witness with\" the ministers and\nwitnesses of Jesus Christ (Heb. ii. 3, 4; 1 Cor. xii. 4-11): was\nthis testimony on the side of Paul, or the Circumcisionists? Did it\nsustain the gospel of the grace of God, or the \"other gospel\" of\nLegalism?\n\n\"He, the Spirit of truth, shall testify of Me,\" Christ had said; and\nso John, at the end of the Apostolic age: \"It is the Spirit that\nbeareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.\" When the Galatians\naccepted the message of the cross proclaimed by Paul's lips, \"the\nHoly Spirit fell\" on them, as on the Jewish Church at the Pentecost,\nand the Gentile believers in the house of Cornelius (Acts x. 44);\n\"the love of God was poured out in their hearts through the Holy\nGhost that was given them\" (Rom v. 5). As a mighty, rushing wind\nthis supernatural influence swept through their souls. Like fire\nfrom heaven it kindled in their spirit, consuming their lusts and\nvanities, and fusing their nature into a new, holy passion of love to\nChrist and to God the Father. It broke from their lips in ecstatic\ncries, unknown to human speech; or moved them to unutterable groans\nand pangs of intercession (Rom. viii. 26).\n\nThere were men in the Galatian Churches on whom the baptism of\nthe Spirit conferred besides miraculous _charismata_, superhuman\npowers of insight and of healing. These gifts God continued to\n\"minister amongst\" them (_God_ is unquestionably the agent in ver.\n5). Paul asks them to observe on what conditions, and to whom,\nthese extraordinary gifts are distributed. For the \"receiving of\nthe Spirit\" was an infallible sign of true Christian faith. This\nwas the very proof which in the first instance had convinced Peter\nand the Judean Church that it was God's will to save the Gentiles,\nindependently of the Mosaic law (Acts xi. 15-18).\n\nReceiving the Spirit, the Galatian believers knew that they were\nthe sons of God. \"God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into their\nhearts, crying, _Abba, Father_\" (ch. iv. 6, 7). When Paul speaks\nof \"receiving the Spirit,\" it is this that he thinks of most of\nall. The miraculous phenomena attending His visitations were facts\nof vast importance; and their occurrence is one of the historical\ncertainties of the Apostolic age. They were \"signs,\" conspicuous,\nimpressive, indispensable at the time--monuments set up for all\ntime. But they were in their nature variable and temporary. There\nare powers greater and more enduring than these. The things that\n\"abide\" are \"faith, hope, love;\" love chiefest of the three. Hence\nwhen the Apostle in a later chapter enumerates the qualities that go\nto make up \"the fruit of the Spirit,\" he says nothing of _tongues_\nor _prophecies_, or _gifts of healing_; he begins with _love_.\nWonder-working powers had their times and seasons, their peculiar\norgans; but every believer in Christ--whether Jew or Greek, primitive\nor medi\u00e6val or modern Christian, the heir of sixty generations of\nfaith or the latest convert from heathenism--joins in the testimony,\n\"The love of God is shed abroad in our heart by the Holy Ghost given\nunto us.\" This mark of God's indwelling Spirit the Galatians had\npossessed. They were \"sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus\" (ch.\niii. 26). And with the filial title they had received the filial\nnature. They were \"taught of God to love one another.\" Being sons of\nGod in Christ, they were also \"heirs\" (ch. iv. 7; Rom viii. 17). They\npossessed the earnest of the heavenly inheritance (Eph. i. 14), the\npledge of their bodily redemption (Rom. viii. 10-23), and of eternal\nlife in the fellowship of Christ. In their initial experience of \"the\nsalvation which is in Jesus Christ\" they had the foretaste of its\n\"eternal glory,\" of the \"grace\" belonging to \"them that love our Lord\nJesus Christ,\" which is \"in incorruption.\"[78]\n\n [78] 2 Tim. ii. 10; Eph. vi. 24 (\u1f00\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 is _incorruption_\n everywhere else in Paul: why not here?)\n\nNo legal condition was laid down at this beginning of their Christian\nlife; no \"work\" of any kind interposed between the belief of the\nheart and the conscious reception of the new life in Christ. Even\ntheir baptism, significant and memorable as it was, had not been\nrequired as in itself a precondition of salvation. Sometimes after\nbaptism, but often--as in the case of Cornelius' household--before\nthe rite was administered, \"the Holy Ghost fell\" on believing souls\n(Acts x. 44-48; xi. 15, 16). They \"confessed with their mouth the\nLord Jesus;\" they \"believed in their hearts that God had raised Him\nfrom the dead,\"--and they were saved. Baptism is, as Paul's teaching\nelsewhere shows,[79] the expression, not the medium--the symbol, and\nnot the cause, of the new birth which it might precede or follow.\nThe Catholic doctrine of the _opus operatum_ in the sacraments is\nradically anti-Pauline; it is Judaism over again. The process by\nwhich the Galatians became Christians was essentially spiritual. They\nhad begun _in the Spirit_.\n\n [79] Ch. iii. 26, 27; Rom. vi. 2-4; Col. ii. 11-13; Tit. iii. 5.\n\nAnd so they must continue. To begin in the Spirit, and then look\nfor perfection to the flesh, to suppose that the work of faith and\nlove was to be consummated by Pharisaic ordinances, that Moses could\nlead them higher than Christ, and circumcision effect for them what\nthe power of the Holy Ghost failed to do--this was the height of\nunreason. \"Are you so senseless?\" the Apostle asks.\n\nHe dwells on this absurdity, pressing home his expostulation with\nan emphasis that shows he is touching the centre of the controversy\nbetween himself and the Judaizers. They admitted, as we have shown in\nChapter IX., that Gentiles might _enter_ the kingdom of God through\nfaith and by the baptism of the Spirit. This was settled at the\nCouncil of Jerusalem. Without a formal acceptance of this evangelical\nprinciple, we do not see how the Legalists could again have found\nentrance into Gentile Christian Churches, much less have carried\nPeter and Barnabas and the liberal Jews of Antioch with them, as they\ndid. They no longer attempted to deny salvation to the uncircumcised;\nbut they claimed for the circumcised a more complete salvation, and\na higher status in the Church. \"Yes, Paul has laid the foundation,\"\nthey would say; \"now we have come to perfect his work, to give\nyou the more advanced instruction, derived from the fountain-head\nof Christian knowledge, from the first Apostles in Jerusalem. _If\nyou would be perfect, keep the commandments_; be circumcised, like\nChrist and His disciples, and observe the law of Moses. If you be\ncircumcised, Christ will profit you much more than hitherto; and you\nwill inherit all the blessings promised in Him to the children of\nAbraham.\"\n\nSuch was the style of \"persuasion\" employed by the Judaizers. It was\nwell calculated to deceive Jewish believers, even those best affected\nto their Gentile brethren. It appeared to maintain the prescriptive\nrights of Judaism and to satisfy legitimate national pride, without\nexcluding the Gentiles from the fold of Christ. Nor is it difficult\nto understand the spell which the circumcisionist doctrine exerted\nover susceptible Gentile minds, after some years of Christian\ntraining, of familiarity with the Old Testament and the early history\nof Israel. Who is there that does not feel the charm of ancient\nmemories and illustrious names? Many a noble mind is at this present\ntime \"bewitched,\" many a gifted and pious spirit is \"carried away\"\nby influences precisely similar. _Apostolical succession, patristic\nusage, catholic tradition, the authority of the Church_--what words\nof power are these! How wilful and arbitrary it appears to rely upon\nany present experience of the grace of God, upon one's own reading\nof the gospel of Christ, in contradiction to claims advanced under\nthe patronage of so many revered and time-honoured names. The man,\nor the community, must be deeply conscious of having \"received the\nSpirit,\" that can feel the force of attractions of this nature, and\nyet withstand them. It requires a clear view of the cross of Jesus\nChrist, an absolute faith in the supremacy of spiritual principles\nto enable one to resist the fascinations of ceremonialism and\ntradition. They offer us a more \"ornate worship,\" a more \"refined\"\ntype of piety, \"consecrated by antiquity;\" they invite us to enter\na selecter circle, and to place ourselves on a higher level than\nthat of the vulgar religionism of faith and feeling. It is the\nGalatian \"persuasion\" over again. Ceremony, antiquity, ecclesiastical\nauthority are after all poor substitutes for faith and love. If they\ncome between us and the living Christ, if they limit and dishonour\nthe work of His Spirit, we have a right to say, and we will say with\nthe Apostle Paul, _Away with them!_\n\nThe men of tradition are well content that we should \"begin in the\nSpirit,\" provided they may have the finishing of our faith. To prey\nupon the Pauline Churches is their ancient and natural habit. An\nevangelical beginning is too often followed by a ritualistic ending.\nAnd Paul is ever begetting spiritual children, to see himself robbed\nof them by these bewitching Judaizers. \"O foolish Galatians,\" he\nseems still to be saying, What is it that charms you so much in all\nthis ritual and externalism? Does it bring you nearer to the cross\nof Christ? Does it give you more of His Spirit? Is it a spiritual\nsatisfaction that you find in these works of Church law, these\npriestly ordinances and performances? How can the sons of God return\nto such childish rudiments? Why should a religion which began so\nspiritually seek its perfection by means so formal and mechanical?\n\nThe conflict which this Epistle signalised is one that has never\nceased. Its elements belong to human nature. It is the contest\nbetween the religion of the Spirit and that of the letter, between\nthe spontaneity of personal faith and the rights of usage and\nprescription. The history of the Church is largely the record of\nthis incessant struggle. In every Christian community, in every\nearnest and devout spirit, it is repeated in some new phase. When\nthe Fathers of the Church in the second and third centuries began\nto write about \"the new law\" and to identify the Christian ministry\nwith the Aaronic priesthood, it was evident that Legalism was\nregaining its ascendancy. Already the foundations were laid of the\nCatholic Church-system, which culminated in the Papacy of Rome. What\nPaul's opponents sought to do by means of circumcision and Jewish\nprerogatives, that the Catholic legalists have done, on a larger\nscale, through the claims of the priesthood and the sacramental\noffices. The spiritual functions of the private Christian, one\nafter another, were usurped or carelessly abandoned. Step by step\nthe hierarchy interposed itself between Christ and His people's\nsouls, till its mediation became the sole channel and organ of\nthe Holy Spirit's influence. So it has come to pass, by a strange\nirony of history, that under the forms of Pauline doctrine and in\nthe name of the Apostle of the Gentiles joined with that of Peter,\ncatholic Christendom, delivered by him from the Jewish yoke, has\nbeen entangled in a bondage in some respects even heavier and more\nrepressive. If tradition and prescription are to regulate our\nChristian belief, they lead us infallibly to _Rome_, as they would\nhave lead the Galatians to perishing Jerusalem.\n\nIII. Paul said he had but one question to ask his readers, that\nwhich we have already discussed. And yet he does put to them, by way\nof parenthesis, another (ver. 4), suggested by what he has already\ncalled to mind, touching the beginning of their Christian course:\n\"Have ye suffered so many things in vain?\" Their folly was the\ngreater in that _it threatened to deprive them of the fruit of their\npast sufferings in the cause of Christ_.\n\nThe Apostle does not say this without a touch of softened feeling.\nRemembering the trials these Galatians had formerly endured, the\nsacrifices they had made in accepting the gospel, he cannot bear to\nthink of their apostasy. Hope breaks through his fear, grief passes\ninto tenderness as he adds, \"If it be indeed in vain.\" The link of\nreminiscence connecting vv. 3 and 4 is the same as that we find in 1\nThess. i. 6: \"Ye received the word in much affliction, with joy of\nthe Holy Ghost.\"[80]\n\n [80] Comp. 2 Thess. i. 4-6; Ph. i. 28-30; Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim.\n i. 8.\n\nWe need not seek for any peculiar cause of these sufferings; nor\nwonder that the Apostle does not mention them elsewhere. Every\ninfant Church had its baptism of persecution. No one could come out\nof heathen society and espouse the cause of Jesus, without making\nhimself a mark for ridicule and violence, without the rupture of\nfamily and public ties, and many painful sacrifices. The hatred of\nPaul's fellow-countrymen towards him was an additional cause of\npersecution to the Churches he had founded. They were followers of\nthe crucified Nazarene, of the apostate Saul. And they had to suffer\nfor it. With the joy of their new life in Christ, there had come\nsharp pangs of loss and grief, heart-wounds deep and lasting. This\nslight allusion sufficiently reminds the Apostle's readers of what\nthey had passed through at the time of their conversion.\n\nAnd now were they going to surrender the faith won by such a\nstruggle? Would they let themselves be cheated of blessings which\nhad cost them so dear? \"_So many things_,\" he asks, \"did you\nsuffer in vain?\" He will not believe it. He cannot think that this\nbrave beginning will have so mean an ending. If \"God counts them\nworthy of His kingdom for which they suffered,\" let them not deem\nthemselves unworthy. Surely they have not escaped from the tyranny of\nheathenism, in order to yield up their liberties to Jewish intrigue,\nto the cozenage of false brethren who seek to exalt themselves at\ntheir expense (ch. ii. 4; iv. 17; vi. 12, 13). Will flattery beguile\nfrom them the treasure to which persecution had made them cling the\nmore closely?\n\nToo often, alas, the Galatian defection is repeated. The generous\ndevotion of youth is followed by the lethargy and formalism of a\nprosperous age; and the man who at twenty-five was a pattern of godly\nzeal, at fifty is a finished worldling. The Christ whom he adored,\nthe cross at which he bowed in those early days--he seldom thinks of\nthem now. \"I remember thee, _the kindness of thy youth_, the love\nof thine espousals; how thou wentest after Me _in the wilderness_.\"\nSuccess has spoiled him. The world's glamour has bewitched him. He\nbids fair to \"end in the flesh.\"\n\nIn a broader sense, the Apostle's question addresses itself to\nChurches and communities untrue to the spiritual principles that\ngave them birth. The faith of the primitive Church, that endured\nthree centuries of persecution, yielded its purity to Imperial\nblandishments. Our fathers, Puritan and Scottish, staked their lives\nfor the crown-rights of Jesus Christ and the freedom of faith.\nThrough generations they endured social and civil ostracism in the\ncause of religious liberty. And now that the battle is won, there\nare those amongst their children who scarcely care to know what the\nstruggle was about. Out of indolence of mind or vanity of scepticism,\nthey abandon at the bidding of priest or sophist the spiritual\nheritage bequeathed to them. Did _they_ then suffer so many things\nin vain? Was it an illusion that sustained those heroic souls, and\nenabled them to \"stop the mouths of lions and subdue kingdoms\"? Was\nit for nought that so many of Christ's witnesses in these realms\nsince the Reformation days have suffered the loss of all things\nrather than yield by subjection to a usurping and worldly priesthood?\nAnd can we, reaping the fruit of their faith and courage, afford in\nthese altered times to dispense with the principles whose maintenance\ncost our forefathers so dear a price?\n\n\"O foolish Galatians,\" Paul in that case might well say to us again!\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\n_ABRAHAM'S BLESSING AND THE LAW'S CURSE._\n\n \"Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him\n for righteousness. Know therefore that they which be of faith,\n the same are sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing\n that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel\n beforehand unto Abraham, _saying_, In thee shall all the nations\n be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with the\n faithful Abraham. For as many as are of the works of the law\n are under a curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one which\n continueth not in all things that are written in the book of\n the law, to do them. Now that no man is justified in the law\n in the sight of God, is evident: for, The righteous shall live\n by faith; and the law is not of faith; but, He that doeth them\n shall live in them. Christ redeemed us from the curse of the\n law, having become a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is\n every one that hangeth on a tree: that upon the Gentiles might\n come the blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus; that we might\n receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.\"--GAL. iii.\n 6-14.\n\n\nFaith then, we have learnt, not works of law, was the condition on\nwhich the Galatians received the Spirit of Christ. By this gate\nthey entered the Church of God, and had come into possession of the\nspiritual blessings common to all Christian believers, and of those\nextraordinary gifts of grace which marked the Apostolic days.\n\nIn this mode of salvation, the Apostle goes on to show, there was\nafter all nothing new. The righteousness of faith is more ancient\nthan legalism. It is as old as _Abraham_. His religion rested on this\nground. \"The promise of the Spirit,\" held by him in trust for the\nworld, was given to his faith. \"You received the Spirit, God works\nin you His marvellous powers, by the hearing of faith--_even as\nAbraham believed God_, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.\"\nIn the hoary patriarchal days as now, in the time of promise as\nof fulfilment, faith is the root of religion; grace invites,\nrighteousness waits upon the hearing of faith. So Paul declares in\nvv. 6-9, and re-affirms with emphasis in ver. 14. The intervening\nsentences set forth by contrast _the curse_ that hangs over the man\nwho seeks salvation by way of law and personal merit.\n\nThus the two standing types of religion, the two ways by which men\nseek salvation, are put in contrast with each other--faith with\nits blessing, law with its curse. The former is the path on which\nthe Galatians had entered, under the guidance of Paul; the latter,\nthat to which the Judaic teachers were leading them. So far the two\nprinciples stand only in antagonism. The antinomy will be resolved in\nthe latter part of the chapter.\n\nBut why does Paul make so much of the faith of _Abraham_? Not only\nbecause it furnished him with a telling illustration, or because the\nwords of Gen. xv. 6 supplied a decisive proof-text for his doctrine:\nhe could not well have chosen any other ground. Abraham's case was\nthe _instantia probans_ in this debate. \"We are Abraham's seed:\"[81]\nthis was the proud consciousness that swelled every Jewish breast.\n\"Abraham's bosom\" was the Israelite's heaven: even in Hades his\nguilty sons could claim pity from \"Father Abraham\" (Luke xvi. 19-31).\nIn the use of this title was concentrated all the theocratic pride\nand national bigotry of the Jewish race. To the example of Abraham\nthe Judaistic teacher would not fail to appeal. He would tell the\nGalatians how the patriarch was called, like themselves, out of the\nheathen world to the knowledge of the true God; how he was separated\nfrom his Gentile kindred, and received the mark of circumcision to be\nworn thenceforth by all who followed in his steps, and who sought the\nfulfilment of the promise granted to Abraham and his seed.\n\n [81] Matt. iii. 9; John viii. 33-59.\n\nThe Apostle holds, as strongly as any Judaist, that the promise\nbelongs to the children of Abraham. _But what makes a son of\nAbraham?_ \"Birth, true Jewish blood, of course,\" replied the\nJudaist. The Gentile, in his view, could only come into a share of\nthe heritage by receiving circumcision, the mark of legal adoption\nand incorporation. Paul answers this question by raising another.\nWhat was it that brought Abraham his blessing? To what did he owe\nhis righteousness? It was _faith_: so Scripture declares--\"Abraham\nbelieved God.\" Righteousness, covenant, promise, blessing--all turned\nupon this. And _the true sons of Abraham are those who are like\nhim_: \"Know then that the men of faith, these are Abraham's sons.\"\nThis declaration is a blow, launched with studied effect full in the\nface of Jewish privilege. Only a Pharisee, only a Rabbi, knew how\nto wound in this fashion. Like the words of Stephen's defence, such\nsentences as these stung Judaic pride to the quick. No wonder that\nhis fellow-countrymen, in their fierce fanaticism of race, pursued\nPaul with burning hate and set a mark upon his life.\n\nBut the identity of Abraham's blessing with that enjoyed by Gentile\nChristians is not left to rest on mere inference and analogy of\nprinciple. Another quotation clinches the argument: \"In thee,\" God\npromised to the patriarch, \"shall be blessed\"--not the natural seed,\nnot the circumcised alone--but \"all the nations (Gentiles)\"![82]\nAnd \"the Scripture\" said this, \"foreseeing\" what is now taking\nplace, namely, \"that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith.\" So that\nin giving this promise to Abraham it gave him his \"gospel before\nthe time (\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03c5\u03b7\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf).\" Good news indeed it was to the noble\npatriarch, that all the nations--of whom as a wide traveller he\nknew so much, and over whose condition he doubtless grieved--were\nfinally to be blessed with the light of faith and the knowledge of\nthe true God; and thus blessed through himself. In this prospect he\n\"rejoiced to see Christ's day;\" nay the Saviour tells us, like Moses\nand Elijah, \"he saw it and was glad.\" Up to this point in Abraham's\nhistory, as Paul's readers would observe, there was no mention of\ncircumcision or legal requirement (ver. 17; Rom. iv. 9-13). It was\non purely evangelical principles, by a declaration of God's grace\nlistened to in thankful faith, that he had received the promise which\nlinked him to the universal Church and entitled every true believer\nto call him father. \"So that the men of faith are blessed, along with\nfaithful Abraham.\"\n\n [82] Gen. xii. 3: the first promise to Abraham. In this text the\n Hebrew and the Greek (LXX) say, _All the tribes (families) of the\n earth_. The synonymous \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7, with its special Jewish connotation,\n suited Paul's purpose better; and it is used in the repetition of\n the promise in Gen. xviii. 18.\n\nI. What then, we ask, was _the nature of Abraham's blessing_? In its\nessence, it was _righteousness_. The \"blessing\" of vv. 9 and 14 is\nsynonymous with the \"justification\" of vv. 6 and 8, embracing with it\nall its fruits and consequences. No higher benediction could come to\nany man than that God should \"count him righteous.\"\n\nPaul and the Legalists agreed in designating righteousness before\nGod man's chief good. But they and he intended different things by\nit. Nay, Paul's conception of righteousness, it is said, differed\nradically from that of the Old Testament, and even of his companion\nwriters in the New Testament. Confessedly, his doctrine presents\nthis idea under a peculiar aspect. But there is a spiritual\nidentity, a common basis of truth, in all the Biblical teaching\non this vital subject. Abraham's righteousness was the state of\na man who trustfully accepts God's word of grace, and is thereby\nset right with God, and put in the way of being and doing right\nthenceforward. In virtue of his faith, God regarded and dealt with\nAbraham as a righteous man. Righteousness of character springs out\nof righteousness of standing. God makes a man righteous by counting\nhim so! This is the Divine paradox of Justification by Faith. When\nthe Hebrew author says, \"God counted it to him for righteousness,\"\nhe does not mean _in lieu of righteousness_, as though faith were\na substitute for a righteousness not forthcoming and now rendered\nsuperfluous; but _so as to amount to righteousness, with a view to\nrighteousness_. This \"reckoning\" is the sovereign act of the Creator,\nwho gives what He demands, \"who maketh alive the dead, and calleth\nthe things that are not as though they were\" (Rom. iv. 17-22). He\nsees the fruit in the germ.\n\nThere is nothing arbitrary, or merely forensic in this imputation.\nFaith is, for such a being as man, the spring of all righteousness\nbefore God, the one act of the soul which is primarily and supremely\nright. What is more just than that the creature should trust\nhis Creator, the child his Father? Here is the root of all right\nunderstanding and right relations between men and God--that which\ngives God, so to speak, a moral hold upon us. And by this trust of\nthe heart, yielding itself in the \"obedience of faith\" to its Lord\nand Redeemer, it comes into communion with all those energies and\npurposes in Him which make for righteousness. Hence from first to\nlast, alike in the earlier and later stages of revelation, man's\nrighteousness is \"not his own;\" it is \"the righteousness that is of\nGod, based upon faith\" (Phil. iii. 9). Faith unites us to the source\nof righteousness, from which unbelief severs us. So that Paul's\nteaching leads us to the fountain-head, while other Biblical teachers\nfor the most part guide us along the course of the same Divine\nrighteousness for man. His doctrine is required by theirs; their\ndoctrine is implied, and indeed more than once expressly stated, in\nhis.[83]\n\n [83] Rom. viii. 4; 1 Cor. vi. 9; Eph. v. 9; Tit. ii. 12-14; etc.\n\nThe Old Testament deals with the materials of character, with the\nqualities and behaviour constituting a righteous man, more than\nwith the cause or process that makes him righteous. All the more\nsignificant therefore are such pronouncements as that of Gen. xv.\n6, and the saying of Hab. ii. 4, Paul's other leading quotation\non this subject. This second reference, taken from the times of\nIsrael's declension, a thousand years and more after Abraham, gives\nproof of the vitality of the righteousness of faith. The haughty,\nsensual Chaldean is master of the earth. Kingdom after kingdom he has\ntrampled down. Judah lies at his mercy, and has no mercy to expect.\nBut the prophet looks beyond the storm and ruin of the time. \"Art\nThou not from everlasting, my God, my Holy One? We shall not die\"\n(Hab. i. 12). The faith of Abraham lives in his breast. The people\nin whom that faith is cannot die. While empires fall, and races are\nswept away in the flood of conquest, \"The just shall live by his\nfaith.\"[84] If faith is seen here at a different point from that\ngiven before, it is still the same faith of Abraham, the grasp of the\nsoul upon the Divine word--_there_ first evoked, _here_ steadfastly\nmaintained, there and here the one ground of righteousness, and\ntherefore of life, for man or for people. Habakkuk and the \"remnant\"\nof his day were \"blessed with faithful Abraham;\" how blessed,\nhis splendid prophecy shows. Righteousness is of faith; life of\nrighteousness: this is the doctrine of Paul, witnessed to by law and\nprophets.\n\n [84] _Of faith_ qualifies _live_ in the Hebrew of the prophet,\n and in the LXX, also in the quotation of Heb. x. 38. The\n presumption is that it does so in Rom. i. 17, and Gal. iii. 11.\n We can see no sufficient reason in these passages to the contrary.\n\nInto what a life of blessing the righteousness of faith introduced\n\"faithful Abraham,\" these Galatian students of the Old Testament very\nwell knew. Twice[85] is he designated \"the friend of God.\" The Arabs\nstill call him _el khalil_,--_the friend_. His image has impressed\nitself with singular force on the Oriental mind. He is the noblest\nfigure of the Old Testament, surpassing Isaac in force, Jacob in\npurity, and both in dignity of character. The man to whom God said,\n\"Fear not, Abraham: I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward;\"\nand again, \"I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be thou perfect:\"\non how lofty a platform of spiritual eminence was he set! The scene\nof Gen. xviii. throws into striking relief the greatness of Abraham,\nthe greatness of our human nature in him; when the Lord says, \"Shall\nI hide from Abraham the thing that I do?\" and allows him to make\nhis bold intercession for the guilty cities of the Plain. Even the\ntrial to which the patriarch was subjected in the sacrifice of Isaac,\nwas a singular honour, done to one whose faith was \"counted worthy\nto endure\" this unexampled strain. His religion exhibits an heroic\nstrength and firmness, but at the same time a large-hearted, genial\nhumanity, an elevation and serenity of mind, to which the temper of\nthose who boasted themselves his children was utterly opposed. Father\nof the Jewish race, Abraham was no Jew. He stands before us in the\nmorning light of revelation a simple, noble, archaic type of _man_,\ntrue \"father of many nations.\" And his faith was the secret of the\ngreatness which has commanded for him the reverence of four thousand\nyears. His trust in God made him worthy to receive so immense a trust\nfor the future of mankind.\n\n [85] 2 Chron. xx. 7; Isai. xli. 8; comp. Jas. ii. 23.\n\nWith Abraham's faith, the Gentiles inherit his blessing. They were\nnot simply blessed _in_ him, through his faith which received\nand handed down the blessing,--but blessed _with_ him. Their\nrighteousness rests on the same principle as his. Religion reverts\nto its earlier purer type. Just as in the Epistle to the Hebrews\nMelchizedek's priesthood is adduced as belonging to a more Christlike\norder, antecedent to and underlying the Aaronic; so we find here,\nbeneath the cumbrous structure of legalism, the evidence of a\nprimitive religious life, cast in a larger mould, with a happier\nstyle of experience, a piety broader, freer, at once more spiritual\nand more human. Reading the story of Abraham, we witness the bright\ndawn of faith, its spring-time of promise and of hope. These\nmorning hours passed away; and the sacred history shuts us in to the\nhard school of Mosaism, with its isolation, its mechanical routine\nand ritual drapery, its yoke of legal exaction ever growing more\nburdensome. Of all this the Church of Christ was to know nothing. It\nwas called to enter into the labours of the legal centuries, without\nthe need of sharing their burdens. In the \"Father of the faithful\"\nand the \"Friend of God\" Gentile believers were to see their exemplar,\nto find the warrant for that sufficiency and freedom of faith of\nwhich the natural children of Abraham unjustly strove to rob them.\n\nII. But if the Galatians are resolved to be under the Law, they must\nunderstand what this means. _The legal state_, Paul declares, instead\nof the blessing of Abraham, _brings with it a curse_: \"As many as are\nof law-works, are under a curse.\"\n\nThis the Apostle, in other words, had told Peter at Antioch. He\nmaintained that whoever sets up the law as a ground of salvation,\n\"makes himself a transgressor\" (ch. ii. 18); he brings upon himself\nthe misery of having violated law. This is no doubtful contingency.\nThe law in explicit terms pronounces its curse against every man who,\nbinding himself to keep it, yet breaks it in any particular.\n\nThe Scripture which Paul quotes to this effect, forms the conclusion\nof the commination uttered by the people of Israel, according to\nthe directions of Moses, from Mount Ebal, on their entrance into\nCanaan: \"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things\nwritten in the book of the law to do them.\"[86] How terribly had\nthat imprecation been fulfilled! They had in truth pledged themselves\nto the impossible. The Law had not been kept--could not be kept on\nmerely legal principles, by man or nation. The confessions of the Old\nTestament, already cited in ch. ii. 16, were proof of this. That no\none had \"continued in all things written in the law to do them,\" goes\nwithout saying. If Gentile Christians adopt the law of Moses, they\nmust be prepared to render an obedience complete and unfaltering in\nevery detail (ch. v. 3)--or have this curse hanging perpetually above\ntheir heads. They will bring on themselves the very condemnation\nwhich was lying so heavily upon the conscience of Israel after the\nflesh.\n\n [86] Deut. xxvii. 26; Jos. viii. 32-35. _All things_, given by\n the LXX in the former passage, is wanting in the Hebrew. But the\n phrase is true to the spirit of this text, and is read in the\n parallel Deut. xxviii. 15.\n\nThis sequence of law and transgression belonged to Paul's deepest\nconvictions. \"The law,\" he says, \"worketh out wrath\" (Rom. iv. 14,\n15). This is an axiom of Paulinism. Human nature being what it is,\nlaw means transgression; and the law being what it is, transgression\nmeans Divine anger and the curse (see p. 143). The law is just;\nthe penalty is necessary. The conscience of the ancient people\nof God compelled them to pronounce the imprecation dictated by\nMoses. The same thing occurs every day, and under the most varied\nmoral conditions. Every man who knows what is right and will not\ndo it, _execrates_ himself. The consciousness of transgression\nis a clinging, inward curse, a witness of ill-desert, foreboding\npunishment. The law of conscience, like that of Ebal and Gerizim,\nadmits of no exceptions, no intermission. In the majesty of its\nunbending sternness it can only be satisfied by our _continuing in\nall things_ that it prescribes. Every instance of failure, attended\nwith whatever excuse or condonation, leaves upon us its mark of\nself-reproach. And this inward condemnation, this consciousness of\nguilt latent in the human breast, is not self-condemnation alone,\nnot a merely subjective state; but it proceeds from God's present\njudgement on the man. It is the shadow of His just displeasure.\n\nWhat Paul here proves from Scripture, bitter experience had taught\nhim. As the law unfolded itself to his youthful conscience, he\napproved it as \"holy and just and good.\" He was pledged and\nresolved to observe it in every point. He must despise himself if\nhe acted otherwise. He strove to be--in the sight of men indeed he\nwas--\"touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.\"\nIf ever a man carried out to the letter the legal requirements,\nand fulfilled the moralist's ideal, it was Saul of Tarsus. Yet his\nfailure was complete, desperate! While men accounted him a paragon of\nvirtue, he loathed himself; he knew that before God his righteousness\nwas worthless. The \"law of sin in his members\" defied \"the law of\nhis reason,\" and made its power the more sensible the more it was\nrepressed. The curse thundered by the six tribes from Ebal resounded\nin his ears. And there was no escape. The grasp of the law was\nrelentless, because it was just, like the grasp of death. Against\nall that was holiest in it the evil in himself stood up in stark,\nimmitigable opposition. \"O wretched man that I am,\" groans the proud\nPharisee, \"who shall deliver me!\" From this curse Christ had redeemed\nhim. And he would not, if he could help it, have the Galatians expose\nthemselves to it again. On legal principles, there is no safety but\nin absolute, flawless obedience, such as no man ever has rendered,\nor ever will. Let them trust the experience of centuries of Jewish\nbondage.\n\nVerses 11, 12 support the assertion that the Law issues in\ncondemnation, by a further, negative proof. The argument is a\nsyllogism, both whose premises are drawn from the Old Testament. It\nmay be formally stated thus. _Major premise_ (evangelical maxim):\n\"The just man lives of faith\"[87] (ver. 11). _Minor_: The man of law\ndoes not live of faith (for he lives by doing: legal maxim, ver.\n12).[88] _Ergo_: The man of law is not just before God (ver. 11).\nWhile therefore the Scripture by its afore-cited commination closes\nthe door of life against righteousness of works, that door is opened\nto the men of faith. The two principles are logical contradictories.\nTo grant righteousness to faith is to deny it to legal works.\nThis assumption furnishes our minor premise in ver. 12. The legal\naxiom is, \"He that doeth them shall live in them:\" that is to say,\n_The law gives life for doing_--not therefore _for believing_; we\nget no sort of legal credit for that. The two ways have different\nstarting-points, as they lead to opposite goals. From faith one\nmarches, through God's righteousness, to blessing; from works,\nthrough self-righteousness, to the curse.\n\n [87] Hab. ii. 4. For the construction, see _note_ on p. 186.\n\n [88] Lev. xviii. 5.\n\nThe two paths now lie before us--the Pauline and the legal method of\nsalvation, the Abrahamic and the Mosaic scheme of religion. According\nto the latter, one begins by keeping so many rules--ethical,\nceremonial, or what not; and after doing this, one expects to be\ncounted righteous by God. According to the former, the man begins by\nan act of self-surrendering trust in God's word of grace, and God\nalready reckons him just on that account, without his pretending to\nanything in the way of merit for himself. In short, the Legalist\n_tries to make God believe in him_: Abraham and Paul are content _to\nbelieve in God_. They do not set themselves over against God, with\na righteousness of their own which He is bound to recognise; they\ncommit themselves to God, that He may work out His righteousness in\nthem. Along this path lies blessing--peace of heart, fellowship with\nGod, moral strength, _life_ in its fulness, depth, and permanence.\nFrom this source Paul derives all that was noblest in the Church of\nthe Old Covenant. And he puts the calm, grand image of Father Abraham\nbefore us for our pattern, in contrast with the narrow, painful,\nbitter spirit of Jewish legalism, inwardly self-condemned.\n\nIII. But how pass from this curse to that blessing? How escape from\nthe nemesis of the broken law into the freedom of Abraham's faith?\nTo this question ver. 13 makes answer: \"Christ bought us out of the\ncurse of the law, having become a curse for us.\" _Christ's redemption\nchanges the curse into a blessing._\n\nWe entered this Epistle under the shadow of the cross. It has been\nall along the centre of the writer's thought. He has found in it the\nsolution of the terrible problem forced upon him by the law. Law had\nled him to Christ's cross; laid him in Christ's grave; and there left\nhim, to rise with Christ a new, free man, living henceforth to God\n(ch. ii. 19-21). So we understand the purpose and the issue of the\ndeath of Jesus Christ; now we must look more narrowly at the fact\nitself.\n\n\"Christ became a curse!\" Verily the Apostle was not \"seeking to\nplease or persuade men.\" This expression throws the scandal of the\ncross into the strongest relief. Far from veiling it or apologizing\nfor it, Paul accentuates this offence. His experience taught him\nthat Jewish pride must be compelled to reckon with it. No, he would\nnot have \"the offence of the cross abolished\" (ch. v. 11).\n\nAnd did not Christ _become a curse_? Could the fact be denied by\nany Jew? His death was that of the most abandoned criminals. By\nthe combined verdict of Jew and Gentile, of civil and religious\nauthority, endorsed by the voice of the populace, He was pronounced\na malefactor and blasphemer. But this was not all. The hatred and\ninjustice of men are hard to bear; yet many a sensitive man has borne\nthem in a worthy cause without shrinking. It was a darker dread, an\ninfliction far more crushing, that compelled the cry, \"My God, why\nhast Thou forsaken Me!\" Against the maledictions of men Jesus might\nsurely at the worst have counted on the Father's good pleasure.\nBut even that failed Him. There fell upon His soul the death of\ndeath, the very curse of sin--_abandonment by God!_ Men \"did esteem\nHim\"--and for the moment He esteemed Himself--\"smitten of God.\" He\nhung there abhorred of men, forsaken of His God; earth all hate,\nheaven all blackness to His view. Are the Apostle's words too strong?\nDelivering up His Son to pass through this baptism, God did in truth\n_make Him a curse_ for us. By His \"determinate counsel\" the Almighty\nset Jesus Christ in the place of condemned sinners, and allowed the\ncurse of this wicked world to claim Him for its victim.\n\nThe death that befell Him was chosen as if for the purpose of\ndeclaring Him accursed. The Jewish people have thus stigmatized\nHim. They made the Roman magistrate and the heathen soldiery their\ninstrument in _gibbeting_ their Messiah. \"Shall I crucify your King?\"\nsaid Pilate. \"Yes,\" they answered, \"crucify Him!\" Their rulers\nthought to lay on the hated Nazarene an everlasting curse. Was it not\nwritten, \"A curse of God is every one that hangeth on a tree?\"[89]\nThis saying attached in the Jewish mind a peculiar loathing to the\nperson of the dead thus exposed. Once _crucified_, the name of Jesus\nwould surely perish from the lips of men; no Jew would hereafter\ndare to profess faith in Him. His cause could never surmount this\nignominy. In later times the bitterest epithet that Jewish scorn\ncould fling against our Saviour (God forgive them!), was just this\nword of Deuteronomy, _hattal\u00fay--the hang\u00e9d one_.\n\n [89] The Hebrew of Deut. xxi. 23 reads \"a curse _of God_;\" the\n LXX, \"cursed _by God_\" (\u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 however, not \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n as in Paul's phrase). The Apostle omits the two last words,\n not inadvertently, as Meyer supposes, for he must have had a\n painfully vivid remembrance of the wording of the original,\n but out of a reverence that made it impossible to speak of the\n Redeemer as \"accursed _by God_.\"\n\nThis sentence of execration, with its shame freshly smarting, Paul\nhas seized and twined into a crown of glory. \"Hanged on a tree,\ncrushed with reproach--_accursed_, you say, He was, my Lord, my\nSaviour! It is true. But the curse He bore was _ours_. His death,\nunmerited by Him, was our ransom-price, endured to buy us out of\nour curse of sin and death.\" This is the doctrine of _the vicarious\nsacrifice_. In speaking of \"ransom\" and \"redemption,\" using the terms\nof the market, Christ and His Apostles are applying human language\nto things in their essence unutterable, things which we define in\ntheir effects rather than in themselves. \"We know, we prophesy, in\npart.\" We know that we were condemned by God's holy law; that Christ,\nHimself sinless, came under the law's curse, and taking the place of\nsinners, \"became sin for us;\" and that His interposition has brought\nus out of condemnation into blessing and peace. How can we conceive\nthe matter otherwise than as it is put in His own words: He \"gave\nHimself a ransom--The Good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep?\"\nHe suffers in our room and stead; He bears inflictions incurred by\nour sins, and due to ourselves; He does this at the Divine Will, and\nunder the Divine Law: what is this but to \"buy us out,\" to pay the\nprice which frees us from the prison-house of death?\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"Christ redeemed _us_,\" says the Apostle, thinking questionless of\nhimself and his Jewish kindred, on whom the law weighed so heavily.\nHis redemption was offered \"to the Jew first.\" But not to the Jew\nalone, nor as a Jew. The time of release had come for all men.\n\"Abraham's blessing\" long withheld, was now to be imparted, as it had\nbeen promised, to \"all the tribes of the earth.\" In the removal of\nthe legal curse, God comes near to men as in the ancient days. His\nlove is shed abroad; His spirit of sonship dwells in human hearts.\nIn Christ Jesus crucified, risen, reigning--a new world comes into\nbeing, which restores and surpasses the promise of the old.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\n_THE COVENANT OF PROMISE._\n\n \"Brethren, I speak after the manner of men: Though it be but a\n man's testament, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh\n it void, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham were the promises\n spoken, and to his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many,\n but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. Now this I say;\n A testament confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came\n four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to\n make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance is of\n the law, it is no more of promise: but God hath granted it to\n Abraham by promise.\"--GAL. iii. 15-18.\n\n\nGentile Christians, Paul has shown, are already sons of Abraham.\nTheir faith proves their descent from the father of the faithful. The\nredemption of Christ has expiated the law's curse, and brought to its\nfulfilment the primeval promise. It has conferred on Jew and Gentile\nalike the gift of the Holy Spirit, sealing the Divine inheritance.\n\"Abraham's blessing\" has \"come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus.\"\nWhat can Judaism do for them more? Except, in sooth, to bring them\nunder its inevitable curse.\n\nBut here the Judaist might interpose: \"Granting so much as this,\nallowing that God covenanted with Abraham on terms of faith, and\nthat believing Gentiles are entitled to his blessing, did not God\nmake _a second covenant with Moses_, promising further blessings\nupon terms of law? If the one covenant remains valid, why not the\nother? From the school of Abraham the Gentiles must pass on to the\nschool of Moses.\" This inference might appear to follow, by parity of\nreasoning, from what the Apostle has just advanced. And it accords\nwith the position which the legalistic opposition had now taken\nup. The people of the circumcision, they argued, retained within\nthe Church of Christ their peculiar calling; and Gentiles, if they\nwould be perfect Christians, must accept the covenant-token and the\nunchangeable ordinances of Israel. Faith is but the first step in\nthe new life; the discipline of the law will bring it to completion.\nRelease from the curse of the law, they might contend, leaves its\nobligations still binding, its ordinances unrepealed. Christ \"came\nnot to destroy, but to fulfil.\"\n\nSo we are brought to the question of _the relation of law and\npromise_, which is the theoretical, as that of Gentile to Jewish\nChristianity is the practical problem of the Epistle. The remainder\nof the chapter is occupied with its discussion. This section is\nthe special contribution of the Epistle to Christian theology--a\ncontribution weighty enough of itself to give to it a foremost\nplace amongst the documents of Revelation. Paul has written nothing\nmore masterly. The breadth and subtlety of his reason, his grasp\nof the spiritual realities underlying the facts of history, are\nconspicuously manifest in these paragraphs, despite the extreme\ndifficulty and obscurity of certain sentences.\n\nThis part of the Epistle is in fact a piece of inspired _historical\ncriticism_; it is a magnificent reconstruction of the course of\nsacred history. It is Paul's theory of doctrinal development,\ncondensing into a few pregnant sentences the _rationale_ of Judaism,\nexplaining the method of God's dealings with mankind from Abraham\ndown to Christ, and fitting the legal system into its place in this\norder with an exactness and consistency that supply an effectual\nverification of the hypothesis. To such a height has the Apostle been\nraised, so completely is he emancipated from the fetters of Jewish\nthought, that the whole Mosaic economy becomes to his mind no more\nthan an interlude, a passing stage in the march of Revelation.\n\nThis passage finds its counterpart in Romans xi. Here the past,\nthere the future fortunes of Israel are set forth. Together the two\nchapters form a Jewish theodicy, a vindication of God's treatment\nof the chosen people from first to last. Rom. v. 12-21 and 1 Cor.\nxv. 20-57 supply a wider exposition, on the same principles, of the\nfortunes of mankind at large. The human mind has conceived nothing\nmore splendid and yet sober, more humbling and exalting, than the\nview of man's history and destiny thus sketched out.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe Apostle seeks to establish, in the first place, _the fixedness\nof the Abrahamic covenant_. This is the main purport of the passage.\nAt the same time, in ver. 16, he brings into view _the Object of the\ncovenant_, the person designated by it--_Christ_, its proper Heir.\nThis consideration, though stated here parenthetically, lies at the\nbasis of the settlement made with Abraham; its importance is made\nmanifest by the after course of Paul's exposition.\n\nAt this point, where the discussion opens out into its larger\nproportions, we observe that the sharp tone of personal feeling with\nwhich the chapter commenced has disappeared. In ver. 15 the writer\ndrops into a conciliatory key. He seems to forget the wounded Apostle\nin the theologian and instructor in Christ. \"Brethren,\" he says,\n\"I speak in human fashion--I put this matter in a way that every\none will understand.\" He lifts himself above the Galatian quarrel,\nand from the height of his argument addresses himself to the common\nintelligence of mankind.\n\nBut is it _covenant_, or _testament_, that the Apostle intends\nhere? \"I speak after the manner of men,\" he continues; \"if the case\nwere that of a man's \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7, once ratified, no one would set it\naside, or add to it.\" The presumption is that the word is employed\nin its accepted, every-day significance. And that unquestionably\nwas \"testament.\" It would never occur to an ordinary Greek reader\nto interpret the expression otherwise. Philo and Josephus, the\nrepresentatives of contemporary Hellenistic usage, read this term,\nin the Old Testament, with the connotation of \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7 in current\nGreek.[90] The context of this passage is in harmony with their\nusage. The \"covenant\" of ver. 15 corresponds to \"the blessing of\nAbraham,\" and \"the promise of the Spirit\" in the two preceding\nverses. Again in ver. 17, \"promise\" and \"covenant\" are synonymous.\nNow a \"covenant of promise\" amounts to a \"testament.\" It is the\n_prospective_ nature of the covenant, the bond which it creates\nbetween Abraham and the Gentiles, which the Apostle has been\ninsisting on ever since ver. 6. It belongs \"to Abraham and to his\nseed\"; it comes by way of \"gift\" and \"grace\" (vv. 18, 22); it invests\nthose taking part in it with \"sonship\" and rights of \"inheritance\"\n(vv. 18, 26, 29, etc.) These ideas cluster round the thought of\n_a testament_; they are not inherent in _covenant_, strictly\nconsidered. Even in the Old Testament this latter designation fails\nto convey all that belongs to the Divine engagements there recorded.\nIn a covenant the two parties are conceived as equals in point of\nlaw, binding themselves by a compact that bears on each alike. Here\nit is not so. The disposition of affairs is made by God, who in the\nsovereignty of His grace \"hath granted it to Abraham.\" It was surely\na reverent sense of this difference which dictated to the men of\nthe Septuagint the use of \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7 rather than \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7, the ordinary\nterm for _covenant_ or _compact_, in their rendering of the Hebrew\n_berith_.\n\n [90] See the able and convincing elucidation of \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7 in\n Cremer's _Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek_.\n\nThis aspect of the covenants now becomes their commanding feature.\nOur Lord's employment of this word at the Last Supper gave it the\naffecting reference to His death which it has conveyed ever since\nto the Christian mind.[91] The Latin translators were guided by a\ntrue instinct when in the Scriptures of the New Covenant they wrote\n_testamentum_ everywhere, not _f\u0153dus_ or _pactum_, for this word. The\ntestament is a covenant--and something more. The testator designates\nhis heir, and binds himself to grant to him at the predetermined time\n(ch. iv. 2) the specified boon, which it remains for the beneficiary\nsimply to accept. Such a Divine _testament_ has come down from\nAbraham to his Gentile sons.\n\n [91] See Heb. ix. 16-18, where so much ingenuity has been\n expended to turn _testament_ into _covenant_.\n\n \"_Sweet is the memory of His name,\n Who blessed us in His will._\"\n\n\n I. Now when a man has made a testament, and it has been\n ratified--\"proved,\" as we should say--_it stands good for ever_.\n No one has afterwards any power to set it aside, or to attach\n to it a new codicil, modifying its previous terms. There it\n stands--a document complete and unchangeable (ver. 15).\n\n Such a testament God gave \"to Abraham and his seed.\" It was\n \"ratified\" (or \"confirmed\") by the final attestation made to\n the patriarch after the supreme trial of his faith in the\n sacrifice of Isaac: \"By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord,\n that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying multiply\n thy seed as the stars of heaven; ... and in thy seed shall all\n the nations of the earth be blessed.\"[92] In human testaments\n the ratification takes place through another; but God \"having\n no greater,\" yet \"to show to the heirs of the promise the\n immutability of His counsel\" confirmed it by His own oath.\n Nothing was wanting to mark the Abrahamic covenant with an\n indelible character, and to show that it expressed an unalterable\n purpose in the mind of God.\n\n [92] Gen. xxii. 16-18; Heb. vi. 17.\n\nWith such Divine asseveration \"were the promises spoken to Abraham,\nand _his seed_.\" This last word diverts the Apostle's thoughts for a\nmoment, and he gives a side-glance at the person thus designated in\nthe terms of the promise. Then he returns to his former statement,\nurging it home against the Legalists: \"Now this is what I mean:\na testament previously ratified by God, the Law which dates four\nhundred and thirty years later cannot annul, so as to abrogate the\nPromise\" (ver. 17). The bearing of Paul's argument is now perfectly\nclear. He is using the promise to Abraham to overthrow the supremacy\nof the Mosaic law. The Promise was, he says, the prior settlement.\nNo subsequent transaction could invalidate it or disqualify those\nentitled under it to receive the inheritance. That testament lies at\nthe foundation of the sacred history. The Jew least of all could deny\nthis. How could such an instrument be set aside? Or what right has\nany one to limit it by stipulations of a later date?\n\nWhen a man amongst ourselves bequeaths his property, and his will\nis publicly attested, its directions are scrupulously observed; to\ntamper with them is a crime. Shall we have less respect to this\nDivine settlement, this venerable charter of human salvation? You\nsay, The Law of Moses has its rights: it must be taken into account\nas well as the Promise to Abraham. True; but it has no power to\ncancel or restrict the Promise, older by four centuries and a half.\nThe later must be adjusted to the earlier dispensation, the Law\ninterpreted by the Promise. God has not made _two_ testaments--the\none solemnly committed to the faith and hope of mankind, only to\nbe retracted and substituted by something of a different stamp. He\ncould not thus stultify Himself. And we must not apply the Mosaic\nenactments, addressed to a single people, in such a way as to\nneutralise the original provisions made for the race at large. Our\nhuman instincts of good faith, our reverence for public compacts and\nestablished rights, forbid our allowing the Law of Moses to trench\nupon the inheritance assured to mankind in the Covenant of Abraham.\n\nThis contradiction necessarily arises if the Law is put on a level\nwith the Promise. To read the Law as a continuation of the older\ninstrument is virtually to efface the latter, to \"make the promise\nof none effect.\" The two institutes proceed on opposite principles.\n\"If the inheritance is of law, it is no longer of promise\" (ver.\n18). Law prescribes certain things to be done, and guarantees a\ncorresponding reward--so much pay for so much work. That, in its\nproper place, is an excellent principle. But the promise stands\non another footing: \"God hath _bestowed_ it on Abraham _by way of\ngrace_\" (\u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, ver. 18). It holds out a blessing conferred by\nthe Promiser's good will, to be conveyed at the right time without\ndemanding anything more from the recipient than faith, which is just\nthe will to receive. So God dealt with Abraham, centuries before any\none had dreamed of the Mosaic system of law. God appeared to Abraham\nin His sovereign grace; Abraham met that grace with faith. So the\nCovenant was formed. And so it abides, clear of all legal conditions\nand claims of human merit, an \"everlasting covenant\" (Gen. xvii. 7;\nHeb. xiii. 20).\n\nIts permanence is emphasized by the _tense_ of the verb relating to\nit. The Greek _perfect_ describes settled facts, actions or events\nthat carry with them finality. Accordingly we read in vv. 15 and 17\nof \"a ratified covenant\"--one that _stands_ ratified. In ver. 18,\n\"God hath granted it to Abraham\"--a grace never to be recalled. Again\n(ver. 19), \"the seed to whom the promise hath been made\"--once for\nall. A perfect participle is used of the Law in ver. 17 (\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ce\u03c2),\nfor it is a fact of abiding significance that it was so much later\nthan the Promise; and in ver. 24, \"the Law hath been our tutor,\"--its\nwork in that respect is an enduring benefit. Otherwise, the verbs\nrelating to Mosaism in this context are past in tense, describing\nwhat is now matter of history, a course of events that has come\nand gone. Meanwhile the Promise remains, an immovable certainty, a\nsettlement never to be disturbed. The emphatic position of \u1f41 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2\n(ver. 18), at the very end of the paragraph, serves to heighten this\neffect. \"It is _God_ that hath bestowed this grace on Abraham.\"\nThere is a challenge in the word, as though Paul asked, \"Who shall\nmake it void?\"[93]\n\n [93] Comp. Rom. viii. 33, 34; Acts xi. 17; 2 Cor. i. 21, for a\n similar emphasis.\n\nPaul's chronology in ver. 17 has been called in question. We are not\nmuch concerned to defend it. Whether Abraham preceded Moses by four\nhundred and thirty years, as the Septuagint and the Samaritan text\nof Exod. xii. 40, 41 affirm, and as Paul's contemporaries commonly\nsupposed; or whether, as it stands in the Hebrew text of Exodus, this\nwas the length of time covered by the sojourn in Egypt, so that the\nentire period would be about half as long again, is a problem that\nOld Testament historians must settle for themselves; it need not\ntrouble the reader of Paul. The shorter period is amply sufficient\nfor his purpose. If any one had said, \"No, Paul; you are mistaken. It\nwas six hundred and thirty, not four hundred and thirty years from\nAbraham to Moses;\" he would have accepted the correction with the\ngreatest goodwill. He might have replied, \"So much the better for my\nargument.\"[94] It is possible to \"strain out\" the \"gnats\" of Biblical\ncriticism, and yet to swallow huge \"camels\" of improbability.\n\n [94] We gain nothing, and we may lose much, in \"trying to settle\n questions of Old Testament historical criticism by casual\n allusions in the New Testament.\" (See Mr. Beet's sensible\n observations, in his Commentary _ad loc._)\n\n\nII. Ver. 16 remains for our consideration. In proving the\nsteadfastness of the covenant with Abraham, the Apostle at the same\ntime directs our attention to _the Person designated by it_, to whom\nits fulfilment was guaranteed. \"To Abraham were the promises spoken,\nand to his seed--'to thy seed,' which is Christ.\"\n\nThis identification the Judaist would not question. He made no\ndoubt that the Messiah was the legatee of the testament, \"the seed\nto whom it hath been promised.\" Whatever partial and germinant\nfulfilments the Promise had received, it is on Christ in chief that\nthe inheritance of Israel devolves. In its true and full intent, this\npromise, like all predictions of the triumph of God's kingdom, was\nunderstood to be waiting for His advent.\n\nThe fact that this Promise looked to Christ, lends additional force\nto the Apostle's assertion of its indelibility. The words \"unto\nChrist,\" which were inserted in the text of ver. 17 at an early\ntime, are a correct gloss. The covenant did not lie between God and\nAbraham alone. It embraced Abraham's descendants in their unity,\nculminating in Christ. It looked down the stream of time to the last\nages. Abraham was its starting-point; Christ its goal. \"To thee--and\nto thy seed:\" these words span the gulf of two thousand years, and\noverarch the Mosaic dispensation. So that the covenant vouchsafed to\nAbraham placed him, even at that distance of time, in close personal\nrelationship with the Saviour of mankind. No wonder that it was so\nevangelical in its terms, and brought the patriarch an experience of\nreligion which anticipated the privileges of Christian faith. God's\ncovenant with Abraham, being in effect His covenant with mankind in\nChrist, stands both first and last. The Mosaic economy holds a second\nand subsidiary place in the scheme of Revelation.\n\nThe reason the Apostle gives for reading _Christ_ into the promise\nis certainly peculiar. He has been taxed with false exegesis, with\n\"rabbinical hair-splitting\" and the like. Here, it is said, is a fine\nexample of the art, familiar to theologians, of torturing out of\na word a predetermined sense, foreign to its original meaning. \"He\ndoth not say, and to _seeds_, as referring to many; but as referring\nto one, and to thy _seed_, which is Christ.\" Paul appears to infer\nfrom the fact that the word \"seed\" is grammatically singular, and\nnot plural, that it designates a single individual, who can be\nno other than Christ. On the surface this does, admittedly, look\nlike a verbal quibble. The word \"seed,\" in Hebrew and Greek as in\nEnglish, is not used, and could not in ordinary speech be used in\nthe plural to denote a number of descendants. It is a collective\nsingular. The plural applies only to _different kinds_ of seed.\nThe Apostle, we may presume, was quite as well aware of this as\nhis critics. It does not need philological research or grammatical\nacumen to establish a distinction obvious to common sense. This piece\nof word-play is in reality the vehicle of an historical argument,\nas unimpeachable as it is important. Abraham was taught, by a\nseries of lessons,[95] to refer the promise to _the single line_\nof Isaac. Paul elsewhere lays great stress on this consideration;\nhe brings Isaac into close analogy with Christ; for he was the\nchild of faith, and represented in his birth a spiritual principle\nand the communication of a supernatural life.[96] The true seed of\nAbraham was in the first instance _one_, not many. In the primary\nrealisation of the Promise, typical of its final accomplishment,\nit received a _singular_ interpretation; it concentrated itself on\nthe one, spiritual offspring, putting aside the many, natural and\nheterogeneous (Hagarite or Keturite) descendants. And this sifting\nprinciple, this law of election which singles out from the varieties\nof nature the Divine type, comes into play all along the line of\ndescent, as in the case of Jacob, and of David. It finds its supreme\nexpression in the person of Christ. The Abrahamic testament devolved\nunder a law of spiritual selection. By its very nature it pointed\nultimately to Jesus Christ. When Paul writes \"Not to seeds, as of\nmany,\" he virtually says that the word of inspiration was singular\nin _sense_ as well as in form; in the mind of the Promiser, and in\nthe interpretation given to it by events, it bore an individual\nreference, and was never intended to apply to Abraham's descendants\nat large, to the many and miscellaneous \"children according to flesh.\"\n\n [95] Gen. xii. 2, 3; xv. 2-6; xvii. 4-8, 15-21; xxii. 16-18.\n\n [96] Ch. iv. 21-31; Rom. iv. 17-22; comp. Heb. xi. 11, 12.\n\nPaul's interpretation of the Promise has abundant analogies. All\ngreat principles of human history tend to embody themselves in\nsome \"chosen seed.\" They find at last their true heir, the _one\nman_ destined to be their fulfilment. Moses, David, Paul; Socrates\nand Alexander; Shakespere, Newton, are examples of this. The work\nthat such men do belongs to themselves. Had any promise assured\nthe world of the gifts to be bestowed through them, in each case\none might have said beforehand, It will have to be, \"Not as of\nmany, but as of one.\" It is not multitudes, but men that rule the\nworld. \"By _one man_ sin entered into the world: we shall reign in\nlife through _the one_ Jesus Christ.\" From the first words of hope\ngiven to the repentant pair banished from Eden, down to the latest\npredictions of the Coming One, the Promise became at every stage\nmore determinate and individualising. The finger of prophecy pointed\nwith increasing distinctness, now from this side, now from that, to\nthe veiled form of the Chosen of God--\"the seed of the woman,\" the\n\"seed of Abraham,\" the \"star out of Jacob,\" the \"Son of David,\" the\n\"King Messiah,\" the suffering \"Servant of the Lord,\" the \"smitten\nShepherd,\" the \"Son of man, coming in the clouds of heaven.\" In His\nperson all the lines of promise and preparation meet; the scattered\nrays of Divine light are brought to a focus. And the desire of all\nnations, groping, half-articulate, unites with the inspired foresight\nof the seers of Israel to find its goal in Jesus Christ. There was\nbut _One_ who could meet the manifold conditions created by the\nworld's previous history, and furnish the key to the mysteries and\ncontradictions which had gathered round the path of Revelation.\n\nNotwithstanding, the Promise had and has a _generic_ application,\nattending its personal accomplishment. \"Salvation is of the Jews.\"\nChrist belongs \"to the Jew first.\" Israel was raised up and\nconsecrated to be the trustee of the Promise given to the world\nthrough Abraham. The vocation of this gifted race, the secret of its\nindestructible vitality, lies in its relationship to Jesus Christ.\nThey are \"His own,\" though they \"received Him not.\" Apart from Him,\nIsrael is nothing to the world--nothing but a witness against itself.\nPremising its essential fulfilment in Christ, Paul still reserves for\nhis own people their peculiar share in the Testament of Abraham--not\na place of exclusive privilege, but of richer honour and larger\ninfluence. \"Hath God cast away His people?\" he asks: \"Nay indeed. For\nI also am an Israelite, of _the seed of Abraham_.\" So that, after\nall, it is something to be of Abraham's children by nature. Despite\nhis hostility to Judaism, the Apostle claims for the Jewish race a\nspecial office in the dispensation of the Gospel, in the working out\nof God's ultimate designs for mankind.[97] Would they only accept\ntheir Messiah, how exalted a rank amongst the nations awaits them!\nThe title \"seed of Abraham\" with Paul, like the \"Servant of Jehovah\"\nin Isaiah, has a double significance. The sufferings of the elect\npeople made them in their national character a pathetic type of the\ngreat Sufferer and Servant of the Lord, His supreme Elect. In Jesus\nChrist the collective destiny of Israel is attained; its prophetic\nideal, the spiritual conception of its calling, is realised,--\"the\nseed to whom it hath been promised.\"\n\n [97] Rom. xi.\n\n * * * * *\n\nPaul is not alone in his insistence on the relation of Christ to\nAbraham. It is announced in the first sentence of the New Testament:\n\"the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, _son of Abraham_, son\nof David.\" And it is set forth with singular beauty in the Gospel of\nthe Infancy. Mary's song and Zacharias' prophecy recall the freedom\nand simplicity of an inspiration long silenced, as they tell how \"the\nLord hath visited and redeemed His people; He hath shown mercy to our\nfathers, in remembrance of His holy covenant, the oath which He sware\n_unto Abraham our father_.\" And again, \"He hath helped Israel His\nservant in remembrance of His mercy, as He spake to our fathers, _to\nAbraham and to his seed_ for ever.\"[98] These pious and tender souls\nwho watched over the cradle of our Lord and stood in the dawning of\nHis new day, instinctively cast their thoughts back to the Covenant\nof Abraham. In it they found matter for their songs and a warrant\nfor their hopes, such as no ritual ordinances could furnish. Their\nutterances breathe a spontaneity of faith, a vernal freshness of\njoy and hope to which the Jewish people for ages had been strangers.\nThe dull constraint and stiffness, the harsh fanaticism of the\nHebrew nature, have fallen from them. They have put on the beautiful\ngarments of Zion, her ancient robes of praise. For the time of the\nPromise draws near. Abraham's Seed is now to be born; and Abraham's\nfaith revives to meet Him. It breaks forth anew out of the dry and\nlong-barren soil of Judaism; it is raised up to a richer and an\nenduring life. Paul's doctrine of Grace does but translate into logic\nthe poetry of Mary's and Zacharias' anthems. The Testament of Abraham\nsupplies their common theme.\n\n [98] Luke i. 54, 55, 68-73.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\n_THE DESIGN OF THE LAW._\n\n \"What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions,\n till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made;\n _and it was_ ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator.\n Now a mediator is not _a mediator_ of one; but God is one.\n Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for\n if there had been a law given which could make alive, verily\n righteousness would have been of the law. Howbeit the Scripture\n hath shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in\n Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before\n faith came, we were kept in ward under the law, shut up unto\n the faith which should afterwards be revealed. So that the law\n hath been our tutor _to bring us_ unto Christ, that we might be\n justified by faith.\"--GAL. iii. 19-24.\n\n\n_What then is the law?_ So the Jew might well exclaim. Paul has been\ndoing nothing but disparage it.--\"You say that the Law of Moses\nbrings no righteousness or blessing, but only a curse; that the\ncovenant made with Abraham ignores it, and does not admit of being\nin any way qualified by its provisions. What then do you make of it?\nIs it not God's voice that we hear in its commands? Have the sons\nof Abraham ever since Moses' day been wandering from the true path\nof faith?\" Such inferences might be drawn, not unnaturally, from\nthe Apostle's denunciation of Legalism. They were actually drawn by\nMarcion in the second century, in his extreme hostility to Judaism\nand the Old Testament.\n\nThis question must indeed have early forced itself upon Paul's mind.\nHow could the doctrine of Salvation by Faith and the supremacy of the\nAbrahamic Covenant be reconciled with the Divine commission of Moses?\nHow, on the other hand, could the displacement of the Law by the\nGospel be justified, if the former too was authorised and inspired\nby God? Can the same God have given to men these two contrasted\nrevelations of Himself? The answer, contained in the passage before\nus, is that the two revelations had different ends in view. They are\ncomplementary, not competing institutes. Of the two, the Covenant of\nPromise has the prior right; it points immediately to Christ. The\nLegal economy is ancillary thereto; it never professed to accomplish\nthe work of grace, as the Judaists would have it do. Its office\nwas external, but nevertheless accessory to that of the Promise.\nIt guarded and schooled the infant heirs of Abraham's Testament,\nuntil the time of its falling due, when they should be prepared in\nthe manhood of faith to enter on their inheritance. \"The law hath\nbeen our tutor for Christ, with the intent we should be justified by\nfaith\" (ver. 24).\n\nThis aspect of the Law, under which, instead of being an obstacle\nto the life of faith, it is seen to subserve it, has been suggested\nalready. \"For I,\" the Apostle said, \"_through law_ died to law\" (ch.\nii. 19). The Law first impelled him to Christ. It constrained him\nto look beyond itself. Its discipline was a preparation for faith.\nPaul reverses the relation in which faith and Law were set by the\nJudaists. They brought in the Law to perfect the unfinished work\nof faith (ver. 3): he made it preliminary and prop\u00e6deutic. What\nthey gave out for more advanced doctrine, he treats as the \"weak\nrudiments,\" belonging to the infancy of the sons of God (ch. iv.\n1-11). Up to this point, however, the Mosaic law has been considered\nchiefly in a negative way, as a foil to the Covenant of grace.\nThe Apostle has now to treat of its nature more positively and\nexplicitly, first indeed _in contrast with the promise_ (vv. 19, 20);\nand secondly, _in its co-operation with the promise_ (vv. 22-24).\nVer. 21 is the transition from the first to the second of these\nconceptions.\n\nI. \"For the sake of the transgressions (committed against it)[99]\nthe law was added.\" The Promise, let us remember, was complete in\nitself. Its testament of grace was sealed and delivered ages before\nthe Mosaic legislation, which could not therefore retract or modify\nit. The Law was \"superadded,\" as something over and above, attached\nto the former revelation for a subsidiary purpose lying outside the\nproper scope of the Promise. What then was this purpose?\n\n [99] \u03a4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd: the definite article can scarcely mean less\n than this.\n\n1. _For the sake of transgressions._ In other words, the object of\nthe law of Moses was _to develope sin_. This is not the whole of the\nApostle's answer; but it is the key to his explanation. This design\nof the Mosaic revelation determined its form and character. Here is\nthe standpoint from which we are to estimate its working, and its\nrelation to the kingdom of grace. The saying of Rom. v. 20 is Paul's\ncommentary upon this sentence: \"The law came in by the way, in order\nthat the trespass (of Adam) might multiply.\" The same necessity is\nexpressed in the paradox of 1 Cor. xv. 56: \"The strength of sin is\nthe law.\"\n\nThis enigma, as a psychological question, is resolved by the Apostle\nin Rom. vii. 13-24. The law acts as a spur and provocative, rousing\nthe power of sin to conscious activity. However good in itself,\ncoming into contact with man's evil flesh, its promulgation is\nfollowed inevitably by transgression. Its commands are so many\noccasions for sin to come into action, to exhibit and confirm its\npower. So that the Law practically assumes the same relation to sin\nas that in which the Promise stands to righteousness and life. In its\nunion with the Law our sinful nature perpetually \"brings forth fruit\nunto death.\" And this mournful result God certainly contemplated when\nHe gave the Law of Moses.\n\nBut are we compelled to put so harsh a sense on the Apostle's words?\nMay we not say that the Law was imposed in order to _restrain_\nsin, to keep it within bounds? Some excellent interpreters read\nthe verse in this way. It is quite true that, in respect of public\nmorals and the outward manifestations of evil, the Jewish law\nacted beneficially, as a bridle upon the sinful passions. But\nthis is beside the mark. The Apostle is thinking only of inward\nrighteousness, that which avails before God. The wording of the\nclause altogether excludes the milder interpretation. _For the sake\nof_ (\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, Latin _gratia_) signifies _promotion_, not _prevention_.\nAnd the word _transgression_, by its Pauline and Jewish usage,\ncompels us to this view.[100] Transgression presupposes law. It\nis the specific form which sin takes under law--the re-action of\nsin against law. What was before a latent tendency, a bias of\ndisposition, now starts to light as a flagrant, guilty fact. By\nbringing about repeated transgressions the Law reveals the true\nnature of sin, so that it \"becomes exceeding sinful.\" It does not\nmake matters worse; but it shows how bad they really are. It\naggravates the disease, in order to bring it to a crisis. And this is\na necessary step towards the cure.\n\n [100] Comp. the reference to this word in Chapter IX., p. 143.\n\n2. The Law of Moses was therefore _a provisional\ndispensation_,--\"added until the seed should come to whom the promise\nhath been made.\" Its object was to make itself superfluous. It \"is\nnot made for a righteous man; but for the lawless and unruly\" (1\nTim. i. 9). Like the discipline and drill of a strictly governed\nboyhood, it was calculated to produce a certain effect on the moral\nnature, after the attainment of which it was no longer needed and its\ncontinuance would be injurious. The essential part of this effect\nlay, however, not so much in the outward regularity it imposed, as\nin the inner repugnancy excited by it, the consciousness of sin\nunsubdued and defiant. By its operation on the conscience the Law\ntaught man his need of redemption. It thus prepared the platform\nfor the work of Grace. The Promise had been given. The coming of\nthe Covenant-heir was assured. But its fulfilment was far off. \"The\nLord is not slack concerning His promise,\"--and yet it was two\nthousand years before \"Abraham's seed\" came to birth. The degeneracy\nof the patriarch's children in the third and fourth generation\nshowed how little the earlier heirs of the Promise were capable of\nreceiving it. A thousand years later, when the Covenant was renewed\nwith David, the ancient predictions seemed at last nearing their\nfulfilment. But no; the times were still unripe; the human conscience\nbut half-disciplined. The bright dawn of the Davidic monarchy\nwas overclouded. The legal yoke is made more burdensome; sore\nchastisements fall on the chosen people, marked out for suffering\nas well as honour. Prophecy has many lessons yet to inculcate. The\nworld's education for Christ has another millennium to run.\n\nNor when He came, did \"the Son of man find faith in the earth\"! The\npeople of the Law had no sooner seen than they hated \"Him to whom the\nlaw and the prophets gave witness.\" Yet, strangely enough, the very\nmanner of their rejection showed how complete was the preparation for\nHis coming. Two features, rarely united, marked the ethical condition\nof the Jewish people at this time--an intense moral consciousness,\nand a deep moral perversion; reverence for the Divine law,\ncombined with an alienation from its spirit. The chapter of Paul's\nautobiography to which we have so often referred (Rom. vii. 7-24) is\ntypical of the better mind of Judaism. It is the _ne plus ultra_ of\nself-condemnation. The consciousness of sin in mankind has ripened.\n\n3. And further, the Law of Moses revealed God's will _in a veiled\nand accommodated fashion_, while the Promise and the Gospel are its\ndirect emanations. This is the inference which we draw from vv. 19,\n20.\n\nWe are well aware of the extreme difficulty of this passage. Ver. 20\nhas received, it is computed, some four hundred and thirty distinct\ninterpretations. Of all the \"hard things our beloved brother Paul\"\nhas written, this is the very hardest. The words which make up the\nsentence are simple and familiar; and yet in their combination most\nenigmatic. And it stands in the midst of a paragraph among the most\ninteresting and important that the Apostle ever wrote.\n\nLet us look first at the latter clause of ver. 19: \"ordained\nthrough angels, in the hand (_i.e._ by means) of a mediator.\" These\ncircumstances, as the orthodox Jew supposed, _enhanced_ the glory\nof the Law. The pomp and formality under which Mosaism was ushered\nin, the presence of the angelic host to whose agency the terrific\nmanifestations attending the Law-giving were referred, impressed\nthe popular mind with a sense of the incomparable sacredness of the\nSinaitic revelation. It was this assumption which gave its force\nto the climax of Stephen's speech, of which we hear an echo in\nthese words of Paul: \"who received the law at the disposition of\nangels--and have not kept it!\"[101] The simplicity and informality of\nthe Divine communion with Abraham, and again of Christ's appearance\nin the world and His intercourse with men, afford a striking contrast\nto all this.\n\n [101] Acts vii. 53: comp. \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd and \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9'\n \u1f00\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd. Stephen's last words may well have lingered in the ear\n of Saul. From the lips of Stephen, they were something of an\n _argumentum ad hominem_.\n\nMore is hinted than is expressly said in Scripture of the part taken\nby the angels in the Law-giving. Deut. xxxiii. 2[102] and Ps. lxviii.\n17 give the most definite indications of the ancient faith of Israel\non this point. But \"the Angel of the Lord\" is a familiar figure of\nOld Testament revelation. In Hebrew thought impressive physical\nphenomena were commonly associated with the presence of spiritual\nagents.[103] The language of Heb. i. 7 and ii. 2 endorses this\nbelief, which in no way conflicts with natural science, and is in\nkeeping with the Christian faith.\n\n [102] A doubtful citation at the best: the reading of the LXX is\n more to the point than the Hebrew text.\n\n [103] See the quotations from Jewish writers to this effect given\n by Meyer or Lightfoot.\n\nBut while such intermediacy, from the Jewish standpoint, increased\nthe splendour and authority of the Law, believers in Christ had\nlearned to look at the matter otherwise.[104] A revelation\n\"administered _through angels_,\" spoke to them of a God distant and\nobscured, of a people unfit for access to His presence. This is\nplainly intimated in the added clause, \"by means of _a mediator_,\"--a\ntitle commonly given to Moses, and recalling the entreaty of Exod.\nxx. 19; Deut. v. 22-28: \"The people said, Speak thou with us, and we\nwill hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die.\" These are the\nwords of sinful men, receiving a law given, as the Apostle has just\ndeclared, on purpose to convict them of their sins. The form of the\nMosaic revelation tended therefore in reality not to exalt the Law,\nbut to exhibit its difference from the Promise and the distance at\nwhich it placed men from God.\n\n [104] Comp. Heb. ii. 2-4; also Col. ii. 15: \"(_scil._ God) having\n stripped off the principalities and powers\"--the earlier forms of\n angelic mediation. The writer may refer on this latter passage to\n his note in the _Pulpit Commentary_, also to _The Expositor_, 1st\n series, x. 403-421.\n\nThe same thought is expressed, as Bishop Lightfoot aptly shows, by\nthe figure of \"the veil on Moses' face,\" which Paul employs with so\nmuch felicity in 2 Cor. iii. 13-18. In the external glory of the\nSinaitic law-giving, as on the illuminated face of the Law-giver,\nthere was a fading brightness, a visible lustre concealing its\nimperfect and transitory character. The theophanies of the Old\nCovenant were a magnificent veil, hiding while they revealed. Under\nthe Law, _angels, Moses_ came between God and man. It was God who\nin His own grace conveyed the promise to justified Abraham (ver.\n18).[105]\n\n [105] But the title \"mediator\" belongs to _Christ_, given by Paul\n himself--the \"one mediator between God and men, the man Christ\n Jesus\" (1 Tim. ii. 5). (Comp. Heb. viii. 6; ix. 15; xii. 24.)\n Christ is so styled however under an aspect very different from\n that in which the word appears here. \"There is one mediator,\"\n the Apostle writes in 1 Timothy, \"_who gave Himself a ransom for\n all_,\" the one _atoning_ mediator. But Christ's manifestation of\n God was direct, as that of Moses was not. His Person does not\n come between men and God, like that of the Sinaitic mediator; it\n brings God into immediate contact with men. Moses acted for a\n distant God: Christ is Immanuel, _God with us_. On the _human_\n side Christ is mediator (\u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2); He acts for\n individual men with God. On the _Divine_ side, He is more than\n mediator, being God Himself.\n\nThe Law employed _a mediator_; the Promise did not (ver. 19.). With\nthis contrast in our minds we approach ver. 20. On the other side\nof it (ver. 21), we find Law and Promise again in sharp antithesis.\nThe same antithesis runs through the intervening sentence. The two\nclauses of ver. 20 belong to the Law and Promise respectively. \"Now\na mediator is not of one:\" that is an axiom which holds good of\n_the Law_. \"But God is one:\" this glorious truth, the first article\nof Israel's creed, applies to _the Promise_. Where \"a mediator\" is\nnecessary, unity is wanting,--not simply in a numerical, but in a\nmoral sense, as matter of feeling and of aim. There are separate\ninterests, discordant views to be consulted. This was true of\nMosaism. Although in substance \"holy and just and good,\" it was\nby no means purely Divine. It was not the absolute religion. Not\nonly was it defective; it contained, in the judgement of Christ,\npositive elements of wrong, precepts given \"for the hardness of\nmen's hearts.\"[106] It largely consisted of \"carnal ordinances,\nimposed till the time of rectification\" (Heb. ix. 10). The theocratic\nlegislation of the Pentateuch is lacking in the unity and consistency\nof a perfect revelation. Its disclosures of God were refracted in a\nmanifest degree by the atmosphere through which they passed.\n\n [106] Matt. xix. 8. Comp. Ezek. xx. 25.\n\n\"But God is one.\" Here again the unity is moral and essential--of\ncharacter and action, rather than of number. In the Promise God spoke\nimmediately and for Himself. There was no screen to intercept the\nview of faith, no go-between like Moses, with God on the mountain-top\nshrouded in thunder-clouds and the people terrified or wantoning far\nbelow. Of all differences between the Abrahamic and Judaic types\nof piety this was the chief. The man of Abraham's faith sees God\nin His unity. The Legalist gets his religion at second-hand, mixed\nwith undivine elements. He believes that there is one God; but his\nhold upon the truth is formal. There is no unity, no simplicity of\nfaith in his conception of God. He projects on to the Divine image\nconfusing shadows of human imperfection.\n\nGOD IS ONE: this great article of faith was the foundation of\nIsrael's life. It forms the first sentence of the Shem\u00e1, the \"Hear, O\nIsrael\" (Deut. vi. 4-9), which every pious Jew repeats twice a day,\nand which in literal obedience to the Law-giver's words he fixes\nabove his house-door, and binds upon his arm and brow at the time of\nprayer. Three times besides has the Apostle quoted this sentence.\nThe first of these passages, Rom. iii. 29, 30,[107] may help us to\nunderstand its application here. In that place he employs it as a\nweapon against Jewish exclusiveness. If there is but \"_one_ God,\"\nhe argues, there can be only _one_ way of justification, for Jew\nand Gentile alike. The inference drawn here is even more bold and\nsingular. There is \"one God,\" who appeared in His proper character in\nthe Covenant with Abraham. If the Law of Moses gives us a conception\nof His nature in any wise different from this, it is because other\nand lower elements found a place in it. Through the whole course\nof revelation there is _one God_--manifest to Abraham, veiled in\nMosaism, revealed again in His perfect image in \"the face of Jesus\nChrist.\"\n\n [107] Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6; 1 Tim. ii. 5; also Mark xii. 29, 30;\n Jas. ii. 19.\n\nII. So far the Apostle has pursued the contrast between the systems\nof Law and Grace. When finally he has referred the latter rather\nthan the former to the \"one God,\" we naturally ask, \"Is the Law then\n_against_ the promises of God?\" (ver. 21). Was the Legal dispensation\na mere reaction, a retrogression from the Promise? This would be\nto push Paul's argument to an antinomian extreme. He hastens to\nprotest.--\"The law against the promises? Away with the thought.\"\nNot on the Apostle's premises, but on those of his opponents, did\nthis consequence ensue. It is _they_ who set the two at variance, by\ntrying to make law do the work of grace. \"For if a law had been given\nthat could bring men to life, righteousness would verily in that\ncase have been of law\" (ver. 21). That righteousness, and therefore\nlife, is not of law, the Apostle has abundantly shown (ch. ii. 16;\niii. 10-13). Had the Law provided some efficient means of its own for\nwinning righteousness, there would then indeed have been a conflict\nbetween the two principles. As matters stand, there is none. Law\nand Promise move on different planes. Their functions are distinct.\nYet there is a connection between them. The design of the Law is to\nmediate between the Promise and its fulfilment. \"The trespass\" must\nbe \"multiplied,\" the knowledge of sin deepened, before Grace can\ndo its office. The fever of sin has to come to its crisis, before\nthe remedy can take effect. Law is therefore not the enemy, but\nthe minister of Grace. It was charged with a purpose lying beyond\nitself. \"Christ is the end of the law, for righteousness\" (Rom. x. 4).\n\n1. For, in the first place, _the law cuts men off from all other hope\nof salvation_.\n\nOn the Judaistic hypothesis, \"righteousness would have been of law.\"\nBut quite on the contrary, \"the Scripture shuts up everything under\nsin, that the promise might be given in the way of faith in Jesus\nChrist, to them that believe\" (ver. 22). Condemnation inevitable,\nuniversal, was pronounced by the Divine word under the Law, not in\norder that men might remain crushed beneath its weight, but that,\nabandoning vain hopes of self-justification, they might find in\nChrist their true deliverer.\n\nThe Apostle is referring here to the general purport of \"the\nScripture.\" His assertion embraces the whole teaching of the Old\nTestament concerning human sinfulness, embodied, for example, in the\nchain of citations drawn out in Rom. iii. 10-18. Wherever the man\nlooking for legal justification turned, the Scripture met him with\nsome new command which drove him back upon the sense of his moral\nhelplessness. It fenced him in with prohibitions; it showered on\nhim threatenings and reproaches; it besieged him in ever narrowing\ncircles. And if he felt less the pressure of its outward burdens, all\nthe more was he tormented by inward disharmony and self-accusation.\n\nNow the judgement of Scripture is not uttered against this class of\nmen or that, against this type of sin or that. Its impeachment sweeps\nthe entire area of human life, sounding the depths of the heart,\nsearching every avenue of thought and desire. It makes of the world\none vast prison-house, with the Law for gaoler, and mankind held fast\nin chains of sin, waiting for death. In this position the Apostle\nhad found himself (Rom. vii. 24-viii. 2); and in his own heart he\nsaw a mirror of the world. \"Every mouth was stopped, and all the\nworld brought in guilty before God\" (Rom. iii. 19). This condition\nhe graphically describes in terms of his former experience, in ver.\n23: \"Before faith came, under law we were kept in ward, being shut\nup unto the faith that was to be revealed.\" The Law was all the\nwhile standing guard over its subjects, watching and checking every\nattempt to escape,[108] but intending to hand them over in due time\nto the charge of Faith. The Law posts its ordinances, like so many\nsentinels, round the prisoner's cell. The cordon is complete. He\ntries again and again to break out; the iron circle will not yield.\nBut deliverance will yet be his. The day of Faith approaches. It\ndawned long ago in Abraham's Promise. Even now its light shines into\nhis dungeon, and he hears the word of Jesus, \"Thy sins are forgiven\nthee; go in peace.\" Law, the stern gaoler, has after all been a good\nfriend, if it has reserved him for this. It prevents the sinner\nescaping to a futile and illusive freedom.\n\n [108] Hence the _present_ participle, \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 (Revised\n reading of ver. 23), in combination with the _imperfect_ of the\n foregoing verb, \u1f10\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1.\n\nIn this dramatic fashion Paul shows how the Mosaic law by its ethical\ndiscipline prepared men for a life which by itself it was incapable\nof giving. Where Law has done its work well, it produces, as in the\nApostle's earlier experience, a profound sense of personal demerit, a\ntenderness of conscience, a contrition of heart which makes one ready\nthankfully to receive \"the righteousness which is of God by faith.\"\nIn every age and condition of life a like effect is wrought upon\nmen who honestly strive to live up to an exacting moral standard.\nThey confess their failure. They lose self-conceit. They grow \"poor\nin spirit,\" willing to accept \"the abundance of _the gift_ of\nrighteousness\" in Jesus Christ.\n\n_Faith_ is trebly honoured here. It is the condition of the gift,\nthe characteristic of its recipient (vv. 22, 24), and the end for\nwhich he was put under the charge of Law (ver. 23). \"To them that\nbelieve\" is \"given,\" as it was in foretaste to Abraham (ver. 6), a\nrighteousness unearned, and bestowed on Christ's account (ch. iii.\n13; Rom. v. 17, 18); which brings with it the indwelling of the Holy\nSpirit, reserved in its conscious possession for Abraham's children\nin the faith of Christ (ch. iii. 14; iv. 4). These blessings form\nthe commencement of that true life, whose root is a spiritual union\nwith Christ, and which reaches on to eternity (ch. ii. 20; Rom. v.\n21; vi. 23). Of such life the Law could impart nothing; but it taught\nmen their need of it, and disposed them to accept it. This was the\npurpose of its institution. It was the forerunner, not the finisher,\nof Faith.\n\n2. Paul makes use of a second figure to describe the office of\nthe Law; under which he gives his final answer to the question of\nver. 19. The metaphor of the gaoler is exchanged for that of _the\ntutor_. \"The law hath been our \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f78\u03c2 for Christ.\" This Greek\nword (_boy-leader_) has no English equivalent; we have not the thing\nit represents. The \"pedagogue\" was a sort of nursery governor,--a\nconfidential servant in the Greek household, commonly a slave, who\nhad charge of the boy from his infancy, and was responsible for his\noversight. In his food, his clothes, his home-lessons, his play, his\nwalks--at every point the pedagogue was required to wait upon his\nyoung charge, and to control his movements. Amongst other offices,\nhis tutor might have to conduct the boy to school; and it has been\nsupposed that Paul is thinking of this duty, as though he meant, \"The\nLaw has been our pedagogue, to take us to Christ, our true teacher.\"\nBut he adds, \"That we might be justified of faith.\" The \"tutor\" of\nver. 24 is parallel to the \"guard\" of the last verse; he represents a\ndistinctly disciplinary influence.\n\nThis figure implies not like the last the imprisoned condition of the\nsubject--but _his childish, undeveloped state_. This is an advance\nof thought. The Law was something more than a system of restraint\nand condemnation. It contained an element of progress. Under the\ntutelage of his pedagogue the boy is growing up to manhood. At the\nend of its term the Law will hand over its charge mature in capacity\nand equal to the responsibilities of faith. \"If then the Law is a\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03cc\u03c2, it is not hostile to Grace, but its fellow-worker; but\nshould it continue to hold us fast when Grace has come, then it would\nbe hostile\" (Chrysostom).\n\nAlthough the highest function, that of \"giving life,\" is denied to\nthe Law, a worthy part is still assigned to it by the Apostle. It\nwas \"a tutor to lead men to Christ.\" Judaism was an education for\nChristianity. It prepared the world for the Redeemer's coming. It\ndrilled and moralised the religious youth of the human race. It\nbroke up the fallow-ground of nature, and cleared a space in the\nweed-covered soil to receive the seed of the kingdom. Its moral\nregimen deepened the conviction of sin, while it multiplied its\novert acts. Its ceremonial impressed on sensuous natures the idea\nof the Divine holiness; and its sacrificial rites gave definiteness\nand vividness to men's conceptions of the necessity of atonement,\nfailing indeed to remove sin, but awakening the need and sustaining\nthe hope of its removal (Heb. x. 1-18).\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe Law of Moses has formed in the Jewish nation a type of humanity\nlike no other in the world. \"They dwell alone,\" said Balaam, \"and\nshall not be reckoned amongst the nations.\" Disciplined for ages\nunder their harsh \"pedagogue,\" this wonderful people acquired a\nstrength of moral fibre and a spiritual sensibility that prepared\nthem to be the religious leaders of mankind. Israel has given us\nDavid and Isaiah, Paul and John. Christ above all was \"born under\nlaw--of David's seed according to flesh.\" The influence of Jewish\nminds at this present time on the world's higher thought, whether\nfor good or evil, is incalculable; and it penetrates everywhere.\nThe Christian Church may with increased emphasis repeat Paul's\nanticipation, \"What will the receiving of them be, but life from the\ndead!\" They have a great service still to do for the Lord and for His\nChrist. It was well for them and for us that they have \"borne the\nyoke in their youth.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\n_THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD._\n\n \"But now that faith is come, we are no longer under a tutor.\n For ye are all sons of God, through faith in Christ Jesus. For\n as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ.\n There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond\n nor free, there can be no male and female: for ye all are one\n _man_ in Christ Jesus. And if ye are Christ's, then are ye\n Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise.\"--GAL. iii. 25-29.\n\n\n\"Faith has come!\" At this announcement Law the tutor yields up his\ncharge; Law the gaoler sets his prisoner at liberty. The age of\nservitude has passed. In truth it endured long enough. The iron of\nits bondage had entered into the soul. But at last Faith is come;\nand with it comes a new world. The clock of time cannot be put back.\nThe soul of man will never return to the old tutelage, nor submit\nagain to a religion of rabbinism and sacerdotalism. \"We are no longer\nunder a pedagogue;\" we have ceased to be children in the nursery,\nschoolboys at our tasks--\"ye are all sons of God.\" In such terms the\nnewborn, free spirit of Christianity speaks in Paul. He had tasted\nthe bitterness of the Judaic yoke; no man more deeply. He had felt\nthe weight of its impossible exactions, its fatal condemnation. This\nsentence is a shout of deliverance. \"Wretch that I am,\" he had cried,\n\"who shall deliver me?--I give thanks to God through Jesus Christ\nour Lord; ... for the law of the Spirit of life in Him hath freed me\nfrom the law of sin and death\" (Rom. vii. 24-viii. 2).\n\nFaith is the true emancipator of the human mind. It comes to take its\nplace as mistress of the soul, queen in the realm of the heart; to\nbe henceforth its spring of life, the norm and guiding principle of\nits activity. \"The life that I live in the flesh,\" Paul testifies,\n\"I live in faith.\" The Mosaic law--a system of external, repressive\nordinances--is no longer to be the basis of religion. Law itself,\nand for its proper purposes, Faith honours and magnifies (Rom. iii.\n31). It is in the interests of Law that the Apostle insists on\nthe abolishment of its Judaic form. Faith is an essentially just\nprinciple, the rightful, original ground of human fellowship with\nGod. In the age of Abraham, and even under the Mosaic r\u00e9gime, in the\nreligion of the Prophets and Psalmists, faith was the quickening\nelement, the well-spring of piety and hope and moral vigour. Now\nit is brought to light. It assumes its sovereignty, and claims its\ninheritance. Faith is come--for Christ is come, its \"author and\nfinisher.\"\n\nThe efficacy of faith lies in _its object_. \"Works\" assume an\nintrinsic merit in the doer; faith has its virtue in Him it trusts.\nIt is the soul's recumbency on Christ. \"Through faith in Christ\nJesus,\" Paul goes on to say, \"ye are all sons of God.\" Christ\nevokes the faith which shakes off legal bondage, leaving the age\nof formalism and ritual behind, and beginning for the world an era\nof spiritual freedom. \"_In_ Christ Jesus\" faith has its being; He\nconstitutes for the soul a new atmosphere and habitat, in which faith\nawakens to full existence, bursts the confining shell of legalism,\nrecognises itself and its destiny, and unfolds into the glorious\nconsciousness of its Divine sonship.\n\nWe prefer, with Ellicott and Meyer, to attach the complement \"in\nChrist Jesus\"[109] to \"faith\" (so in A.V.), rather than to the\npredicate, \"Ye are sons\"--the construction endorsed by the _Revised_\ncomma after \"faith.\" The former connection, more obvious in itself,\nseems to us to fall in with the Apostle's line of thought. And it is\nsustained by the language of ver. 27. _Faith in Christ_, _baptism\ninto Christ_, and _putting on Christ_ are connected and correspondent\nexpressions. The first is the spiritual principle, the ground or\nelement of the new life; the second, its visible attestation; and the\nthird indicates the character and habit proper thereto.\n\n [109] The phrase _faith in Christ Jesus_ is a link between this\n Epistle and those of the third and fourth groups. Comp. Col.\n i. 4; Eph. i. 15; 1 Tim. iii. 13; 2 Tim. i. 13; iii. 15. More\n frequently in this connection our \"in\" represents \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 (_into_),\n not \u1f10\u03bd as here.\n\nI. It is _faith in Christ_ then which _constitutes us sons of God_.\nThis principle is the foundation-stone of the Christian life.\n\nIn the Old Testament the sonship of believers lay in shadow. Jehovah\nwas \"the King, the Lord of Hosts,\" the \"Shepherd of Israel.\" They\nare \"His people, the sheep of His pasture\"--\"My servant Jacob,\" He\nsays, \"Israel whom I have chosen.\" If He is named _Father_, it is\nof the collective Israel, not the individual; otherwise the title\noccurs only in figure and apostrophe. The promise of this blessedness\nhad never been explicitly given under the Covenant of Moses. The\nassurance quoted in 2 Cor. vi. 18 is pieced together from scattered\nhints of prophecy. Old-Testament faith hardly dared to dream of such\na privilege as this. It is not ascribed even to Abraham. Only to the\nkingly \"Son of David\" is it said, \"I will be a Father unto him; and\nhe shall be to me for a son\" (2 Sam. vii. 14).\n\nBut \"beloved, now are we children of God\" (1 John iii. 2). The filial\nconsciousness is the distinction of the Church of Jesus Christ. The\nApostolic writings are full of it. The unspeakable dignity of this\nrelationship, the boundless hopes which it inspires, have left their\nfresh impress on the pages of the New Testament. The writers are\nmen who have made a vast discovery. They have sailed out into a new\nocean. They have come upon an infinite treasure. \"Thou art no longer\na slave, but a son!\" What exultation filled the soul of Paul and of\nJohn as they penned such words! \"The Spirit of glory and of God\"\nrested upon them.\n\nThe Apostle is virtually repeating here what he said in vv. 2-5\ntouching the \"receiving of the Spirit,\" which is, he declared, the\ndistinctive mark of the Christian state, and raises its possessor\n_ipso facto_ above the religion of externalism. The antithesis of\n_flesh and spirit_ now becomes that of _sonship and pupilage_. Christ\nHimself, in the words of Luke xi. 13, marked out the gift of \"the\nHoly Spirit\" as the bond between the \"heavenly Father\" and His human\nchildren. Accordingly Paul writes immediately, in ch. iv. 6, 7, of\n\"God sending forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts\" to show\nthat we \"are sons,\" where we find again the thought which follows\nhere in ver. 27, viz. that _union with Christ_ imparts this exalted\nstatus. This is after all the central conception of the Christian\nlife. Paul has already stated it as the sum of his own experience:\n\"Christ lives in me\" (ch. ii. 20). \"I have put on Christ\" is the same\nthing in other words. In ch. ii. 20 he contemplates the union as an\ninner, vitalising force; here it is viewed as matter of status and\ncondition. The believer is _invested with Christ_. He enters into the\nfilial estate and endowments, since he is _in Christ Jesus_. \"For\nif Christ is Son of God, and thou hast put on Him, having the Son\nin thyself and being made like to Him, thou wast brought into one\nkindred and one form of being with Him\" (Chrysostom).\n\nThis was true of \"so many as were baptized into Christ\"--an\nexpression employed not in order to limit the assertion, but\nto extend it coincidently with the \"all\" of ver. 26. There\nwas no difference in this respect between the circumcised and\nuncircumcised. Every baptized Galatian was a son of God. Baptism\nmanifestly presupposes faith. To imagine that the _opus operatum_,\nthe mechanical performance of the rite apart from faith present or\nanticipated in the subject, \"clothes us with Christ,\" is to hark\nback to Judaism. It is to substitute baptism for circumcision--a\ndifference merely of form, so long as the doctrine of ritual\nregeneration remains the same. This passage is as clear a proof as\ncould well be desired, that in the Pauline vocabulary \"baptized\"\nis synonymous with \"believing.\" The baptism of these Galatians\nsolemnised their spiritual union with Christ. It was the public\nacceptance, in trust and submission, of God's covenant of grace--for\ntheir children haply, as well as for themselves.\n\nIn the case of the infant, the household to which it belongs, the\nreligious community which receives it to be nursed in its bosom,\nstand sponsors for its faith. On them will rest the blame of broken\nvows and responsibility disowned, if their baptized children are left\nto lapse into ignorance of Christ's claims upon them. The Church\nwhich practises infant baptism assumes a very serious obligation. If\nit takes no sufficient care to have the rite made good, if children\npass through its laver to remain unmarked and unshepherded, it is\nsinning against Christ. Such administration makes His ordinance an\nobject of superstition, or of contempt.\n\nThe baptism of the Galatians signalised their entrance \"into\nChrist,\" the union of their souls with the dying, risen Lord. They\nwere \"baptized,\" as Paul phrases it elsewhere, \"into His death,\"\nto \"walk\" henceforth with Him \"in newness of life.\" By its very\nform--the normal and most expressive form of primitive baptism,\nthe descent into and rising from the symbolic waters--it pictured\nthe soul's death with Christ, its burial and its resurrection in\nHim, its separation from the life of sin and entrance upon the new\ncareer of a regenerated child of God (Rom. vi. 3-14). This power\nattended the ordinance \"through faith in the operation of God who\nraised Christ from the dead\" (Col. ii. 11-13). Baptism had proved\nto them \"the laver of regeneration\" in virtue of \"the renewing of\nthe Holy Spirit,\" under those spiritual conditions of accepted\nmercy and \"justification by grace through faith,\"[110] without\nwhich it is a mere law-work, as useless as any other. It was the\noutward and visible sign of the inward transaction which made the\nGalatian believers sons of God and heirs of life eternal. It was\ntherefore a \"putting on of Christ,\" a veritable assumption of the\nChristian character, the filial relationship to God. Every such\nbaptism announced to heaven and earth the passage of another soul\nfrom servitude to freedom, from death unto life, the birth of a\nbrother into the family of God. From this day the new convert was a\nmember incorporate of the Body of Christ, affianced to his Lord, not\nalone in the secret vows of his heart, but pledged to Him before his\nfellow-men. He had _put on Christ_--to be worn in his daily life,\nwhile He dwelt in the shrine of his spirit. And men would see Christ\nin him, as they see the robe upon its wearer, the armour glittering\non the soldier's breast.\n\n [110] Rom. vi. 1, 2; Tit. iii. 4-7 (\"not of _works_ ... that we\n had done).\"\n\nBy receiving Christ, inwardly accepted in faith, visibly assumed in\nbaptism, we are made sons of God. _He_ makes us free of the house\nof God, where He rules as Son, and where no slave may longer stay.\nThose who called themselves \"Abraham's seed\" and yet were \"slaves\nof sin,\" must be driven from the place in God's household which\nthey dishonoured, and must forfeit their abused prerogatives. They\nwere not Abraham's children, for they were utterly unlike him; the\nDevil surely was their father, whom by their lusts they featured. So\nChrist declared to the unbelieving Jews (John viii. 31-44). And so\nthe Apostle identifies the children of Abraham with the sons of God,\nby faith united to \"the Son.\" Alike in the historical sonship toward\nAbraham and the supernatural sonship toward God, Christ is the ground\nof filiation. Our sonship is grafted upon His. He is \"the vine,\" we\n\"branches\" in Him. He is _the_ seed of Abraham, _the_ Son of God; we,\nsons of God and Abraham's seed--\"if we are Christ's.\" Through Him we\nderive from God; through Him all that is best in the life of humanity\ncomes down to us. Christ is the central stock, the spiritual root of\nthe human race. His manifestation reveals God to man, and man also\nto himself. In Jesus Christ we regain the Divine image, stamped upon\nus in Him at our creation (Col. i. 15, 16; iii. 10, 11), the filial\nlikeness to God which constitutes man's proper nature. Its attainment\nis the essential blessing, the promise which descended from Abraham\nalong the succession of faith.\n\nNow this dignity belongs universally to Christian faith. \"Ye are\n_all_,\" the Apostle says, \"sons of God through faith in Him.\" Sonship\nis a human, not a Jewish distinction. The discipline Israel had\nendured, it endured for the world. The Gentiles have no need to pass\nthrough it again. Abraham's blessing, when it came, was to embrace\n\"all the families of the earth.\" The new life in Christ in which\nit is realised, is as large in scope as it is complete in nature.\n\"Faith in Christ Jesus\" is a condition that opens the door to every\nhuman being,--\"Jew or Greek, bond or free, male or female.\" If then\nbaptized, believing Gentiles are sons of God, they stand already\non a level higher than any to which Mosaism raised its professors.\n\"Putting on Christ,\" they are robed in a righteousness brighter and\npurer than that of the most blameless legalist. What can Judaism do\nfor them more? How could they wish to cover their glorious dress with\nits faded, worn-out garments? To add circumcision to their faith\nwould be not to rise, but to sink from the state of sons to that of\nserfs.\n\nII. On this first principle of the new life there rests a second.\nThe sons of God are brethren to each other. Christianity is the\nperfection of society, as well as of the individual. _The faith of\nChrist restores the broken unity of mankind._ \"In Christ Jesus there\nis no Jew or Greek; there is no bondman or freeman; there is no male\nand female. You are all one in Him.\"\n\nThe Galatian believer at his baptism had entered a communion which\ngave him for the first time the sense of a common humanity. In\nJesus Christ he found a bond of union with his fellows, an identity\nof interest and aim so commanding that in its presence secular\ndifferences appeared as nothing. From the height to which his Divine\nadoption raised him these things were invisible. Distinctions of\nrace, of rank, even that of sex, which bulk so largely in our outward\nlife and are sustained by all the force of pride and habit, are\nforgotten here. These dividing lines and party-walls have no power to\nsunder us from Christ, nor therefore from each other in Christ. The\ntide of Divine love and joy which through the gate of faith poured\ninto the souls of these Gentiles of \"many nations,\" submerged all\nbarriers. They are one in the brotherhood of the eternal life. When\none says \"I am a child of God,\" one no longer thinks, \"I am a Greek\nor Jew, rich or poor, noble or ignoble--man or woman.\" A son of\nGod!--that sublime consciousness fills his being.\n\nPaul, to be sure, does not mean that these differences have ceased\nto exist. He fully recognises them; and indeed insists strongly on\nthe proprieties of sex, and on the duties of civil station. He values\nhis own Jewish birth and Roman citizenship. But \"in Christ Jesus\"\nhe \"counts them refuse\" (Phil. iii. 4-8). Our relations to God, our\nheritage in Abraham's Testament, depend on our faith in Christ Jesus\nand our possession of His Spirit. Neither birth nor office affects\nthis relationship in the least degree. \"As many as are led by the\nSpirit of God, they are the sons of God\" (Rom. viii. 14). This is the\nDivine criterion of churchmanship, applied to prince or beggar, to\narchbishop or sexton, with perfect impartiality. \"God is no respecter\nof persons.\"\n\nThis rule of the Apostle's was a new principle in religion, pregnant\nwith immense consequences. The Stoic cosmopolitan philosophy made a\nconsiderable approach to it, teaching as it did the worth of the\nmoral person and the independence of virtue upon outward conditions.\nBuddhism previously, and Mohammedanism subsequently, each in its own\nway, addressed themselves to man as man, declaring all believers\nequal and abolishing the privileges of race and caste. To their\nrecognition of human brotherhood the marvellous victories won by\nthese two creeds are largely due. These religious systems, with all\ntheir errors, were a signal advance upon Paganism with its \"gods\nmany and lords many,\" its local and national deities, whose worship\nbelittled the idea of God and turned religion into an engine of\nhostility instead of a bond of union amongst men.\n\nGreek culture, moreover, and Roman government, as it has often been\nobserved, had greatly tended to unify mankind. They diffused a\ncommon atmosphere of thought and established one imperial law round\nthe circuit of the Mediterranean shores. But these conquests of\nsecular civilization, the victories of arms and arts, were achieved\nat the expense of religion. Polytheism is essentially barbarian.\nIt flourishes in division and in ignorance. To bring together its\ninnumerable gods and creeds was to bring them all into contempt. The\n_one law_, the _one learning_ now prevailing in the world, created\na void in the conscience of mankind, only to be filled by the _one\nfaith_. Without a centre of spiritual unity, history shows that\nno other union will endure. But for Christianity, the Gr\u00e6co-Roman\ncivilization would have perished, trampled out by the feet of Goths\nand Huns.\n\nThe Jewish faith failed to meet the world's demand for a universal\nreligion. It could never have saved European society. Nor was it\ndesigned for such a purpose. True, its Jehovah was \"the God of the\nwhole earth.\" The teaching of the Old Testament, as Paul easily\nshowed, had a universal import and brought all men within the\nscope of its promises. But in its actual shape and its positive\ninstitutions it was still tribal and exclusive. Mosaism planted\nround the family of Abraham a fence of ordinances, framed of set\npurpose to make them a separate people and preserve them from heathen\ncontamination. This system, at first maintained with difficulty, in\ncourse of time gained control of the Israelitish nature, and its\nexclusiveness was aggravated by every device of Pharisaic ingenuity.\nWithout an entire transformation, without in fact ceasing to be\nJudaism, the Jewish religion was doomed to isolation. Under the Roman\nEmpire, in consequence of the ubiquitous dispersion of the Jews, it\nspread far and wide. It attracted numerous and influential converts.\nBut these proselytes never were, and never could have been generally\namalgamated with the sacred people. They remained in the outer court,\nworshipping the God of Israel \"afar off\" (Eph. ii. 11-22; iii. 4-6).\n\nThis particularism of the Mosaic system was, to Paul's mind, a proof\nof its temporary character. The abiding faith, the faith of \"Abraham\nand his seed,\" must be broad as humanity. It could know nothing of\nJew and Gentile, of master and slave, nor even of man and woman; it\nknows only _the soul and God_. The gospel of Christ allied itself\nthus with the nascent instinct of humanity, the fellow-feeling of\nthe race. It adopted the sentiment of the Roman poet, himself an\nenfranchised slave, who wrote: _Homo sum, et humani a me nil alienum\nputo_. In our religion human kinship at last receives adequate\nexpression. The Son of man lays the foundation of a world-wide\nfraternity. The one Father claims all men for His sons in Christ.\nA new, tenderer, holier humanity is formed around His cross. Men\nof the most distant climes and races, coming across their ancient\nbattle-fields, clasp each other's hands and say, \"Beloved, if God so\nloved us, we ought also to love one another.\"\n\nThe practice of the Church has fallen far below the doctrine of\nChrist and His Apostles. In this respect Mohammedans and Buddhists\nmight teach Christian congregations a lesson of fraternity. The\narrangements of our public worship seem often designed expressly to\nemphasize social distinctions, and to remind the poor man of his\ninequality. Our native _hauteur_ and conventionality are nowhere\nmore painfully conspicuous than in the house of God. English\nChristianity is seamed through and through with caste-feeling. This\nlies at the root of our sectarian jealousies. It is largely due\nto this cause that the social ideal of Jesus Christ has been so\ndeplorably ignored, and that a frank brotherly fellowship amongst\nthe Churches is at present impossible. Sacerdotalism first destroyed\nthe Christian brotherhood by absorbing in the official ministry\nthe functions of the individual believer. And the Protestant\nReformation has but partially re-established these prerogatives. Its\naction has been so far too exclusively negative and _prot\u00e9stant_,\ntoo little constructive and creative. It has allowed itself to be\nsecularised and identified with existing national limitations and\nsocial distinctions. How greatly has the authority of our faith and\nthe influence of the Church suffered from this error. The filial\nconsciousness should produce _the fraternal consciousness_. With the\nformer we may have a number of private Christians; with the latter\nonly can we have a Church.\n\n\"Ye are all,\" says the Apostle, \"one (man) in Christ Jesus.\"\nThe numeral is masculine, not neuter--_one person_ (no abstract\nunity),[111] as though possessing one mind and will, and that \"the\nmind that was in Christ.\" Just so far as individual men are \"in\nChrist\" and He becomes the soul of their life, do they realise\nthis unity. The Christ within them recognises the Christ without,\nas \"face answereth to face in a glass.\" In this recognition social\ndisparity vanishes. We think of it no more than we shall do before\nthe judgement-seat of Christ. What matters it whether my brother\nwears velvet or fustian, if Christ be in him? The humbleness of\nhis birth or occupation, the uncouthness of his speech, cannot\nseparate him, nor can the absence of these peculiarities separate\nhis neighbour, from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Why\nshould these differences make them strangers to each other in the\nChurch? If both are _in Christ_, why are they not _one in Christ_? A\ntide of patriotic emotion, a scene of pity or terror--a shipwreck, an\nearthquake--levels all classes and makes us feel and act as one man.\nOur faith in Christ should do no less. Or do we love God less than\nwe fear death? Is our country more to us than Jesus Christ? In rare\nmoments of exaltation we rise, it may be, to the height at which Paul\nsets our life. But until we can habitually and by settled principle\nin our Church-relations \"know no man after the flesh,\" we come short\nof the purpose of Jesus Christ (comp. John xvii. 20-23).\n\n [111] Comp. Eph. ii. 15; iv. 13; but _neuter_ in ii. 14.\n\nThe unity Paul desiderates would effectually counteract the Judaistic\nagitation. The force of the latter lay in antipathy. Paul's opponents\ncontended that there must be \"Jew and Greek.\" They fenced off the\nJewish preserve from uncircumcised intruders. Gentile nonconformists\nmust adopt their ritual; or they will remain a lower caste, outside\nthe privileged circle of the covenant-heirs of Abraham. Compelled\nunder this pressure to accept the Mosaic law, it was anticipated\nthat they would add to the glory of Judaism and help to maintain its\ninstitutions unimpaired. But the Apostle has cut the ground from\nunder their feet. It is _faith_, he affirms, which makes men sons of\nGod. And faith is equally possible to Jew or Gentile. Then Judaism is\ndoomed. No system of caste, no principle of social exclusion has, on\nthis assumption, any foothold in the Church. Spiritual life, nearness\nand likeness to the common Saviour--in a word _character_, is the\nstandard of worth in His kingdom. And the range of that kingdom is\nmade wide as humanity; its charity, deep as the love of God.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAnd \"if you--whether Jews or Greeks--are Christ's, then are you\nAbraham's seed, heirs in terms of the Promise.\" So the Apostle brings\nto a close this part of his argument, and links it to what he has\nsaid before touching the fatherhood of Abraham. Since ver. 18 we\nhave lost sight of the patriarch; but he has not been forgotten.\nFrom that verse Paul has been conducting us onward through the legal\ncenturies which parted Abraham from Christ. He has shown how the law\nof Moses interposed between promise and fulfilment, schooling the\nJewish race and mankind in them for its accomplishment. Now the long\ndiscipline is over. The hour of release has struck. Faith resumes her\nancient sway, in a larger realm. In Christ a new, universal humanity\ncomes into existence, formed of men who by faith are grafted into\nHim. Partakers of Christ, Gentiles also are of the seed of Abraham;\nthe wild scions of nature share \"the root and fatness of the good\nolive-tree.\" All things are theirs; for they are Christ's (1 Cor.\niii. 21-23).\n\nChrist never stands alone. \"In the midst of the Church--firstborn of\nmany brethren\" He presents Himself, standing \"in the presence of God\nfor us.\" He has secured for mankind and keeps in trust its glorious\nheritage. In Him we hold in fee the ages past and to come. The sons\nof God are heirs of the universe.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI.\n\n_THE HEIR'S COMING OF AGE._\n\n \"But I say that so long as the heir is a child, he differeth\n nothing from a bondservant, though he is lord of all; but is\n under guardians and stewards until the term appointed of the\n father. So we also, when we were children, were held in bondage\n under the rudiments of the world: but when the fulness of the\n time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under\n the law, that He might redeem them which were under the law,\n that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are\n sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts,\n crying, Abba Father. So that thou art no longer a bondservant,\n but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God.\"--GAL. iv.\n 1-7.\n\n\nThe main thesis of the Epistle is now established. Gentile\nChristians, Paul has shown, are in the true Abrahamic succession of\nfaith. And this devolution of the Promise discloses the real intent\nof the Mosaic law, as an intermediate and disciplinary system. Christ\nwas the heir of Abraham's testament; He was therefore the end of\nMoses' law. And those who are Christ's inherit the blessings of the\nPromise, while they escape the curse and condemnation of the Law. The\nremainder of the Apostle's polemic, down to ch. v. 12, is devoted to\nthe illustration and enforcement of this position.\n\nIn this, as in the previous chapter, the pre-Christian state is\nassigned to the Jew, who was the chief subject of Divine teaching\nin the former dispensation; it is set forth under the first person\n(ver. 3), in the language of recollection. Describing the opposite\ncondition of sonship, the Apostle reverts from the first to the\nsecond person, identifying his readers with himself (comp. ch. iii.\n25, 26). True, the Gentiles had been in bondage (vv. 7, 8). This\ngoes without saying. Paul's object is to show that _Judaism_ is a\nbondage. Upon this he insists with all the emphasis he can command.\nMoreover, the legal system contained worldly, unspiritual elements,\ncrude and childish conceptions of truth, marking it, in comparison\nwith Christianity, as an inferior religion. Let the Galatians be\nconvinced of this, and they will understand what Paul is going to say\ndirectly; they will perceive that Judaic conformity is for them a\nbacksliding in the direction of their former heathenism (vv. 8-10).\nBut the force of this latter warning is discounted and its effect\nweakened when he is supposed, as by some interpreters, to include\n_Gentile_ along with Jewish \"rudiments\" already in ver. 3. His\nreaders could not have suspected this. The \"So we also\" and the \"held\nin bondage\" of this verse carry them back to ch. iii. 23. By calling\nthe Mosaic ceremonies \"rudiments of _the world_\" he gives Jewish\nsusceptibilities just such a shock as prepares for the declaration of\nver. 9, which puts them on a level with heathen rites.\n\nThe difference between Judaism and Christianity, historically\nunfolded in ch. iii., is here restated in graphic summary. We see,\nfirst, _the heir of God in his minority_; and again, _the same heir\nin possession of his estate_.\n\nI. One can fancy the Jew replying to Paul's previous argument in\nsome such style as this. \"You pour contempt,\" he would say, \"on the\nreligion of your fathers. You make them out to have been no better\nthan slaves. Abraham's inheritance, you pretend, under the Mosaic\ndispensation lay dormant, and is revived in order to be taken from\nhis children and conferred on aliens.\" No, Paul would answer: I admit\nthat the saints of Israel were sons of God; I glory in the fact--\"who\nare Israelites, whose is _the adoption of sons_ and the glory and the\ncovenants and the law-giving and the promises, whose are the fathers\"\n(Rom. ix. 4, 5). _But they were sons in their minority._ \"And I\nsay that as long as the heir is (legally) an infant, he differs in\nnothing from a slave, though (by title) lord of all.\"\n\nThe man of the Old Covenant was a child of God _in posse_, not\n_in esse_, in right but not in fact. The \"infant\" is his father's\ntrueborn son. In time he will be full owner. Meanwhile he is as\nsubject as any slave on the estate. There is nothing he can command\nfor his own. He is treated and provided for as a bondman might be;\nput \"under stewards\" who manage his property, \"and guardians\" in\ncharge of his person, \"until the day fore-appointed of the father.\"\nThis situation does not exclude, it implies fatherly affection and\ncare on the one side, and heirship on the other. But it forbids\nthe recognition of the heir, his investment with filial rights. It\nprecludes the access to the father and acquaintance with him, which\nthe boy will gain in after years. He sees him at a distance and\nthrough others, under the aspect of authority rather than of love. In\nthis position he does not yet possess the spirit of a son. Such was\nin truth the condition of Hebrew saints--heirs of God, but knowing it\nnot.\n\nThis illustration raises in ver. 2 an interesting legal question,\ntouching the latitude given by Roman or other current law to the\nfather in dealing with his heirs. Paul's language is good evidence\nfor the existence of the power he refers to. In Roman and in Jewish\nlaw the date of civil majority was fixed. Local usage may have been\nmore elastic. But the case supposed, we observe, is not that of a\n_dead_ father, into whose place the son steps at the proper age.\nA grant is made by a father _still living_, who keeps his son in\npupilage till he sees fit to put him in possession of the promised\nestate. There is nothing to show that paternal discretion was limited\nin these circumstances, any more than it is in English law. The\nfather might fix eighteen, or twenty-one, or thirty years as the age\nat which he would give his son a settlement, just as he thought best.\n\nThis analogy, like that of the \"testament\" in ch. iii., is not\ncomplete at all points; nor could any human figure of these Divine\nthings be made so. The essential particulars involved in it are\nfirst, _the childishness of the infant heir_; secondly, _the\nsubordinate position in which he is placed for the time_; and\nthirdly, _the right of the father to determine the expiry of his\ninfancy_.\n\n1. \"When we were children,\" says the Apostle. This implies, not a\nmerely formal and legal bar, but an intrinsic disqualification. To\ntreat the child as a man is preposterous. The responsibilities of\nproperty are beyond his strength and his understanding. Such powers\nin his hands could only be instruments of mischief, to himself most\nof all. In the Divine order, calling is suited to capacity, privilege\nto age. The coming of Christ was timed to the hour. The world of the\nOld Testament, at its wisest and highest, was unripe for His gospel.\nThe revelation made to Paul could not have been received by Moses,\nor David, or Isaiah. His doctrine was only possible after and in\nconsequence of theirs. There was a training of faculty, a deepening\nof conscience, a patient course of instruction and chastening to\nbe carried out, before the heirs of the promise were fit for their\nheritage. Looking back to his own youthful days, the Apostle sees in\nthem a reflex of the discipline which the people of God had required.\nThe views he then held of Divine truth appear to him low and\nchildish, in comparison with the manly freedom of spirit, the breadth\nof knowledge, the fulness of joy which he has attained as a son of\nGod through Christ.\n\n2. But what is meant by the \"stewards and guardians\" of this Jewish\nperiod of infancy? Ver. 3 tells us this, in language, however,\nsomewhat obscure: \"We were held in bondage under _the rudiments_ (or\n_elements_) _of the world_\"--a phrase synonymous with the foregoing\n\"under law\" (ch. iii. 23). The \"guard\" and \"tutor\" of the previous\nsection re-appears, with these \"rudiments of the world\" in his\nhand. They form the system under which the young heir was schooled,\nup to the time of his majority. They belonged to \"the world\"[112]\ninasmuch as they were, in comparison with Christianity, unspiritual\nin their nature, uninformed by \"the Spirit of God's Son\" (ver. 6).\nThe language of Heb. ix. 1, 10 explains this phrase: \"The first\ncovenant had a _worldly_ sanctuary,\" with \"ordinances of flesh,\nimposed till the time of rectification.\" The sensuous factor that\nentered into the Jewish revelation formed the point of contact with\nPaganism which Paul brings into view in the next paragraph. Yet rude\nand earthly as the Mosaic system was in some of its features, it was\nDivinely ordained and served an essential purpose in the progress of\nrevelation. It shielded the Church's infancy. It acted the part of a\nprudent steward, a watchful guardian. The heritage of Abraham came\ninto possession of his heirs enriched by their long minority. Mosaism\ntherefore, while spiritually inferior to the Covenant of grace in\nChrist, has rendered invaluable service to it (comp. ver. 24: Chapter\nXIV., p. 225).\n\n [112] Surely _the world of men_, not the cosmical elements; comp.\n Col. ii. 8, 20 (where _rudiments of the world_ is parallel to\n _tradition of men_); also Gal. vi. 14; Heb. ix. 1. 1 Cor. iii.\n 1-3 supplies an interesting parallel: those who are _babes in\n Christ_, are so far carnal and walk _according to man_, animated\n by _the spirit of this world_ (1 Cor. ii. 12).\n\n3. _The will of the Father_ determined the period of this\nguardianship. However it may be in human law, this right of\nfore-ordination resides in the Divine Fatherhood. In His unerring\nforesight He fixed the hour when His sons should step into their\nfilial place. All such \"times and seasons,\" Christ declared, \"the\nFather hath appointed on His own authority\" (Acts i. 7). He imposed\nthe law of Moses, and annulled it, when He would. He kept the Jewish\npeople, for their own and the world's benefit, tied to the legal\n\"rudiments,\" held in the leading-strings of Judaism. It was His to\nsay when this subjection should cease, when the Church might receive\nthe Spirit of His Son. If this decree appeared to be arbitrary, if\nit was strange that the Jewish fathers--men so noble in faith and\ncharacter--were kept in bondage and fear, we must remind ourselves\nthat \"so it seemed good in the Father's sight.\" Hebrew pride found\nthis hard to brook. To think that God had denied this privilege in\ntime past to His chosen people, to bestow it all at once and by mere\ngrace on Gentile sinners, making them at \"the eleventh hour\" equal to\nthose who had borne for so long the burden and heat of the day! that\nthe children of Abraham had been, as Paul maintains, for centuries\ntreated as _slaves_, and now these heathen aliens are made _sons_\njust as much as they! But this was God's plan; and it must be right.\n\"Who art thou, O man, that repliest against God?\"\n\nII. However, the nonage of the Church has passed. God's sons are now\nto be owned for such. _It is Christ's mission to constitute men sons\nof God_ (vv. 4, 5).\n\nHis advent was the turning-point of human affairs, \"the fulness of\ntime.\" Paul's glance in these verses takes in a vast horizon. He\nviews Christ in His relation both to God and to humanity, both to\nlaw and redemption. The appearance of \"the Son of God, woman-born,\"\ncompletes the previous course of time; it is the goal of antecedent\nrevelation, unfolding \"the mystery kept secret through times\neternal,\" but now \"made known to all the nations\" (Rom. xvi. 25,\n26). Promise and Law both looked forward to this hour. Sin had been\n\"passed by\" in prospect of it, receiving hitherto a partial and\nprovisional forgiveness. The aspirations excited, the needs created\nby earlier religion demanded their satisfaction. The symbolism of\ntype and ceremony, with their rude picture-writing, waited for their\nInterpreter. The prophetic soul of \"the wide world, dreaming of\nthings to come,\" watched for this day. They that looked for Israel's\nredemption, the Simeons and Annas of the time, the authentic heirs\nof the promise, knew by sure tokens that it was near. Their aged\neyes in the sight of the infant Jesus descried its rising. The set\ntime had come, to which all times looked since Adam's fall and the\nfirst promise. At the moment when Israel seemed farthest from help\nand hope, the \"horn of salvation was raised up in the house of\nDavid,\"--_God sent forth His Son_.\n\n1. _The sending of the Son_ brought the world's servitude to an\nend. \"Henceforth,\" said Jesus, \"I call you not servants\" (John xv.\n15). Till now \"servant of God\" had been the highest title men could\nwear. The heathen were enslaved to false gods (ver. 8). And Israel,\nknowing the true God, knew Him at a distance, serving too often in\nthe spirit of the elder son of the parable, who said, \"Lo these many\nyears do I _slave_ for thee\" (Luke xv. 29). None could with free\nsoul lift his eyes to heaven and say, \"Abba, Father.\" Men had great\nthoughts about God, high speculations. They had learnt imperishable\ntruths concerning His unity, His holiness, His majesty as Creator and\nLawgiver. They named Him the \"Lord,\" the \"Almighty,\" the \"I AM.\" But\nHis _Fatherhood_ as Christ revealed it, they had scarcely guessed.\nThey thought of Him as humble bondmen of a revered and august master,\nas sheep might of a good shepherd. The idea of a personal _sonship_\ntowards the Holy One of Israel was inconceivable, till Christ brought\nit with Him into the world, till _God sent forth His Son_.\n\nHe sent Him as \"His Son.\" To speak of Christ, with the mystical\nGermans, as the _ideal Urmensch_--the ideal Son of man, the foretype\nof humanity--is to express a great truth. Mankind was created in\nChrist, who is \"the image of God, firstborn of all creation.\" But\nthis is not what Paul is saying here. The doubly compounded Greek\nverb at the head of this sentence (repeated with like emphasis in\nver. 6) signifies \"sent forth from\" Himself: He came in the character\nof _God's_ Son, bringing His sonship with Him. He was the Son of God\nbefore He was sent out. He did not become so in virtue of His mission\nto mankind. His relations with men, in Paul's conception, rested\nupon His pre-existing relationship to God. \"The Word\" who \"became\nflesh, was with God, was God in the beginning.\" \"He called God His\nown Father, making Himself equal with God\" (John v. 18): so the Jews\nhad gathered from His own declarations. Paul admitted the claim when\n\"God revealed His Son\" to him, and affirms it here unequivocally.\n\n\"The Son of God,\" arriving \"in the fulness of time,\" enters human\nlife. Like any other son of man, He is _born of a woman, born under\nlaw_. Here is the _kenosis_, the emptying of Divinity, of which the\nApostle speaks in Phil. ii. 5-8. The phrase \"born of woman,\" does not\nrefer specifically to the _virgin-birth_; this term describes human\norigin on the side of its weakness and dependence (Job xiv. 1; Matt.\nxi. 11). Paul is thinking not of the difference, but of the identity\nof Christ's birth and our own. We are carried back to Bethlehem.\nWe see Jesus a babe lying in His mother's arms--_God's Son a human\ninfant_, drawing His life from a weak woman![113]\n\n [113] Comp. Rom. i. 3, 4; ix. 5; 2 Cor. xiii. 4; Eph. iv. 9, 10;\n Ph. ii. 6-8; Col. i. 15, 18; ii. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 16.\n\nNor is \"born under law\" a distinction intended to limit the previous\nterm, as though it meant a _born Jew_, and not a mere woman's son.\nThis expression, to the mind of the reader of ch. iii., conveys the\nidea of _subjection_, of humiliation rather than eminence. \"Though\nHe was (God's) Son,\" Christ must needs \"learn His obedience\" (Heb.\nv. 8). The Jewish people experienced above all others the power of\nthe law to chasten and humble. Their law was to them more sensibly,\nwhat the moral law is in varying degree to the world everywhere, an\ninstrument of condemnation. God's Son was now put under its power. As\na man He was \"under law;\" as a Jew He came under its most stringent\napplication. He declined none of the burdens of His birth. He\nsubmitted not only to the general moral demands of the Divine law for\nmen, but to all the duties and proprieties incident to His position\nas a man, even to those ritual ordinances which His coming was to\nabolish. He set a perfect example of loyalty. \"Thus it becometh us,\"\nHe said, \"to fulfil all righteousness.\"\n\nThe Son of God who was to end the legal bondage, was sent into it\nHimself. He wore the legal yoke that He might break it. He took \"the\nform of a servant,\" to win our enfranchisement. \"God sent forth His\nSon, human, law-bound--that He might _redeem those under law_.\"\n\nRedemption was Christ's errand. We have learned already how \"He\nredeemed us from the curse of the law,\" by the sacrifice of the\ncross (ch. iii. 13). This was the primary object of His mission: to\nransom men from the guilt of past sin. Now we discern its further\npurpose--the positive and constructive side of the Divine counsel.\nJustification is the preface to _adoption_. The man \"under law\" is\nnot only cursed by his failure to keep it; he lives in a servile\nstate, debarred from filial rights. Christ \"bought us out\" of this\ncondition. While the expiation rendered in His death clears off the\nentail of human guilt, His incarnate life and spiritual union with\nbelieving men sustain that action, making the redemption complete and\npermanent. As enemies, \"we were reconciled to God by the death of\nHis Son;\" now \"reconciled, we shall be saved by His life\" (Rom. v.\n10). Salvation is not through the death of Christ alone. The Babe of\nBethlehem, the crowned Lord of glory is our Redeemer, as well as the\nMan of Calvary. The cross is indeed the centre of His redemption; but\nit has a vast circumference. All that Christ is, all that He has done\nand is doing as the Incarnate Son, the God-man, helps to make men\nsons of God. The purpose of His mission is therefore stated a second\ntime and made complete in the words of ver. 5 _b_: \"that we might\n_receive the adoption of sons_.\" The sonship carries everything else\nwith it--\"if children, then heirs\" (ver. 7). There is no room for any\nsupplementary office of Jewish ritual. That is left behind with our\nbabyhood.\n\n2. So much for the ground of sonship. Its proof lay in the _sending\nforth of the Spirit of the Son_.\n\nThe mission of the Son and that of the Spirit are spoken of in vv.\n3-6 in parallel terms: \"God _sent forth_ His Son--_sent forth_ the\nSpirit of His Son,\" the former into the world of men, the latter\n\"into\" their individual \"hearts.\" The second act matches the first,\nand crowns it. Pentecost is the sequel of the Incarnation (John ii.\n21; 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20). And Pentecost is repeated in the heart of\nevery child of God. The Apostle addresses himself to his readers'\nexperience (\"because _ye_ are sons\") as in ch. iii. 3-6, and on\nthe same point. They had \"received the Spirit:\" this marked them\nindubitably as heirs of Abraham (ch. iii. 14)--and what is more, sons\nof God. Had not the mystic cry, _Abba, Father_, sounded in their\nhearts? The filial consciousness was born within them, supernaturally\ninspired. When they believed in Christ, when they saw in Him the\nSon of God, their Redeemer, they were stirred with a new, ecstatic\nimpulse; a Divine glow of love and joy kindled in their breasts; a\nvoice not their own spoke to their spirit--their soul leaped forth\nupon their lips, crying to God, \"Father, Father!\" They were children\nof God, and knew it. \"The Spirit Himself bore them witness\" (Rom.\nviii. 15).\n\nThis sentiment was not due to their own reflection, not the mere\nopening of a buried spring of feeling in their nature. _God sent it_\ninto their hearts. The outward miracles which attended the first\nbestowment of this gift, showed from what source it came (ch. iii.\n5). Nor did Christ personally impart the assurance. He had gone, that\nthe Paraclete might come. Here was another Witness, sent by a second\nmission from the Father (John xvi. 7). His advent is signalised in\nclear distinction from that of the Son. He comes in the joint name of\nFather and of Son. Jesus called Him \"the Spirit of the Father;\"[114]\nthe Apostle, \"the Spirit of God's Son.\"\n\n [114] Matt. x. 20; Luke xi. 13; John xiv. 16; Acts i. 4, 5.\n\nTo us He is \"the Spirit of adoption,\" replacing the former \"spirit of\nbondage unto fear.\" For by His indwelling we are \"joined to the Lord\"\nand made \"one spirit\" with Him, so that Christ lives in us (ch. ii.\n20). And since Christ is above all things the Son, His Spirit is a\nspirit of sonship; those who receive Him are sons of God. Our sonship\nis through the Holy Spirit derived from His. Till Christ's redemption\nwas effected, such adoption was in the nature of things impossible.\nThis filial cry of Gentile hearts attested the entrance of a Divine\nlife into the world. The Spirit of God's Son had become the new\nspirit of mankind.\n\n_Abba_, the Syrian vocative for _father_, was a word familiar to the\nlips of Jesus. The instance of its use recorded in Mark xiv. 36, was\nbut one of many such. No one had hitherto approached God as He did.\nHis utterance of this word, expressing the attitude of His life of\nprayer and breathing the whole spirit of His religion, profoundly\naffected His disciples. So that the _Abba_ of Jesus became a\nwatchword of His Church, being the proper name of the God and Father\nof our Lord Jesus Christ. Gentile believers pronounced it, conscious\nthat in doing so they were joined in spirit to the Lord who said, \"My\nFather, and your Father!\" Greek-speaking Christians supplemented it\nby their own equivalent, as we by the English _Father_. This precious\nvocable is carried down the ages and round the whole world in the\nmother-tongue of Jesus, a memorial of the hour when through Him men\nlearned to call God Father.\n\n\"Because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit,\" with this cry. The\nwitness of sonship follows on the adoption, and seals it. The child\nis born, then cries; the cry is the evidence of life. But this is\nnot the first office of the Holy Spirit to the regenerate soul. Many\na silent impulse has He given, frequent and long continued may have\nbeen His visitations, before His presence reveals itself audibly.\nFrom the first the new life of grace is implanted by His influence.\n\"That which is _born of the Spirit_, is spirit.\" \"He dwelleth with\nyou, and _is in you_,\"[115] said Jesus to His disciples, before the\nPentecostal effusion. Important and decisive as the witness of the\nHoly Spirit to our sonship is, we must not limit His operation to\nthis event. Deeply has He wrought already on the soul in which His\nwork reaches this issue; and when it is reached, He has still much\nto bestow, much to accomplish in us. All truth, all holiness, all\ncomfort are His; and into these He leads the children of God. Living\nby the Spirit, in Him we proceed to walk (ch. v. 25).\n\n [115] John xiv. 17; the _present_ (\u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd) is the preferable\n reading. See Westcott _ad loc._\n\nThe interchange of person in the subject of vv. 5-8 is very\nnoticeable. This agitated style betrays high-strung emotion. Writing\nfirst, in ver. 3, in the language of Jewish experience, in ver. 6\nPaul turns upon his readers and claims them for witnesses to the same\nadoption which Jewish believers in Christ (ver. 5) had received.\nInstantly he falls back into the first person; it is his own joyous\nconsciousness that breaks forth in the filial cry of ver. 6_b_. In\nthe more calm concluding sentence the second person is resumed; and\nnow in the individualising singular, as though he would lay hold of\nhis readers one by one, and bid them look each into his own heart to\nfind the proof of sonship, as he writes: \"So that thou art no longer\na slave, but a son; and if a son, also an heir through God.\"\n\n_An heir through God_--this is the true reading, and is greatly to\nthe point. It carries to a climax the emphatic repetition of \"God\"\nobserved in vv. 4 and 6. \"_God_ sent His Son\" into the world; \"_God_\nsent\" in turn \"His Son's Spirit into your hearts.\" God then, and\nno other, has bestowed your inheritance. It is yours by His fiat.\nWho dares challenge it?[116] Words how suitable to reassure Gentile\nChristians, browbeaten by arrogant Judaism! Our reply is the same\nto those who at this day deny our Christian and churchly standing,\nbecause we reject their sacerdotal claims.\n\n [116] Comp. Rom. viii. 31-35; Acts xi. 17.\n\nWhat this inheritance includes in its final attainment, \"doth not\nyet appear.\" Enough to know that \"now are we children of God.\" The\nredemption of the body, the deliverance of nature from its sentence\nof dissolution, the abolishment of death--these are amongst\nits certainties. Its supreme joy lies in the promise of being\nwith Christ, to witness and share His glory.[117] \"Heirs of God,\njoint-heirs with Christ\"--a destiny like this overwhelms thought and\nmakes hope a rapture. God's sons may be content to wait and see how\ntheir heritage will turn out. Only let us be sure that we are His\nsons. Doctrinal orthodoxy, ritual observance, moral propriety do\nnot impart, and do not supersede \"the earnest of the Spirit in our\nhearts.\" The religion of Jesus the Son of God is the religion of the\nfilial consciousness.\n\n [117] John xii. 26; xvii. 24; Rev. iii. 21; Phil. i. 23; Col.\n iii. 4; 1 Pet. v. 1.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII.\n\nTHE RETURN TO BONDAGE.\n\n \"Howbeit at that time, not knowing God, ye were in bondage to\n them which by nature are no gods: but now that ye have come to\n know God, or rather to be known of God, how turn ye back again\n to the weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye desire to be in\n bondage over again? Ye observe days, and months, and seasons,\n and years. I am afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed\n labour upon you in vain\"--GAL. iv. 8-11.\n\n\n\"Sons of God, whom He made His heirs in Christ, how are you turning\nback to legal bondage!\" Such is the appeal with which the Apostle\nfollows up his argument. \"Foolish Galatians,\" we seem to hear him say\nagain, \"who has bewitched you into this?\" They forget the call of\nthe Divine grace; they turn away from the sight of Christ crucified;\nnay, they are renouncing their adoption into the family of God.\nPaul knew something of the fickleness of human nature; but he was\nnot prepared for this. How can men who have tasted liberty prefer\nslavery, or fullgrown sons desire to return to the \"rudiments\" of\nchildhood? After knowing God as He is in Christ, is it possible that\nthese Galatians have begun to dote on ceremonial, to make a religion\nof \"times and seasons;\" that they are becoming devotees of Jewish\nritual? What can be more frivolous, more irrational than this? On\nsuch people Paul's labours seem to be thrown away. \"You make me\nfear,\" he says, \"that I have toiled for you in vain.\"\n\nIn this expostulation two principles emerge with especial prominence.\n\nI. First, that _knowledge of God, bringing spiritual freedom, lays\nupon us higher responsibilities_. \"Then indeed,\" he says, \"not\nknowing God, you were in bondage to false gods. Your heathen life was\nin a sense excusable. But now something very different is expected\nfrom you, since you have come to know God.\"\n\nWe are reminded of the Apostle's memorable words spoken at Athens:\n\"The times of ignorance God overlooked\" (Acts xvii. 30). \"Ye say, We\nsee,\" said Jesus; \"your sin remaineth\" (John ix. 41). Increased light\nbrings stricter judgement. If this was true of men who had merely\nheard the message of Christ, how much more of those who had proved\nits saving power. Ritualism was well enough for Pagans, or even for\nJews before Christ's coming and the outpouring of His Spirit--but\nfor Christians! For those into whose hearts God had breathed the\nSpirit of His Son, who had learned to \"worship God in the Spirit and\nto have no confidence in the flesh\"--for Paul's Galatians to yield\nto the legalist \"persuasion\" was a fatal relapse. In principle, and\nin its probable issue, this course was a reverting toward their old\nheathenism.\n\nThe Apostle again recalls them, as he does so often his children in\nChrist, to the time of their conversion. They had been, he reminds\nthem, idolaters; ignorant of the true God, they were \"enslaved to\nthings that by nature are no gods.\" Two definitions Paul has given\nof idolatry: \"There is no idol in the world;\" and again, \"The things\nwhich the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not\nto God\" (1 Cor. viii. 4; x. 20). Half lies, half devilry: such was\nthe popular heathenism of the day. \"Gods many and lords many\" the\nGalatian Pagans worshipped--a strange Pantheon. There were their old,\nweird Celtic deities, before whom our British forefathers trembled.\nOn this ancestral faith had been superimposed the frantic rites of\nthe Phrygian Mother, Cybele, with her mutilated priests; and the more\ngenial and humanistic cultus of the Greek Olympian gods. But they\nwere gone, the whole \"damn\u00e9d crew,\" as Milton calls them; for those\nwhose eyes had seen the glory in the face of Jesus Christ, their\nspell was broken; heaven was swept clear and earth pure of their\nfoul presence. The old gods are dead. No renaissance of humanism, no\nwitchcraft of poetry can re-animate them. To us after these eighteen\ncenturies, as to the Galatian believers, \"there is one God the\nFather, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus\nChrist, through whom are all things, and we through Him.\" A man who\nknew the Old Testament, to say nothing of the teaching of Christ,\ncould never sacrifice to Jupiter and Mercurius any more, nor shout\n\"Great is Diana of the Ephesians.\" They were painted idols, _shams_;\nhe had seen through them. They might frighten children in the dark;\nbut the sun was up. Christianity destroyed Paganism as light kills\ndarkness. Paul did not fear that his readers would slide back into\nactual heathenism. That was intellectually impossible. There are\nwarnings in his Epistles against the spirit of idolatry, and against\nconformity with its customs; but none against return to its beliefs.\n\nThe old heathen life was indeed a _slavery_, full of fear and\ndegradation. The religious Pagan could never be sure that he had\npropitiated his gods sufficiently, or given to all their due. They\nwere jealous and revengeful, envious of human prosperity, capable\nof infinite wrongdoing. In the worship of many of them acts were\nenjoined revolting to the conscience. And this is true of Polytheism\nall over the world. It is the most shameful bondage ever endured by\nthe soul of man.\n\nBut Paul's readers had \"come to know God.\" They had touched the great\nReality. The phantoms had vanished; the Living One stood before them.\nHis glory shone into their hearts \"in the face of Jesus Christ.\"\nThis, whenever it takes place, is for any man the crisis of his\nlife--when he _comes to know God_, when _the God-consciousness_ is\nborn in him. Like the dawn of self-consciousness, it may be gradual.\nThere are those, the happy few, who were \"born again\" so soon as they\nwere born to thought and choice; they cannot remember a time when\nthey did not love God, when they were not sensible of being \"known\nof Him.\" But with others, as with Paul, the revelation is made at an\ninstant, coming like a lightning-flash at midnight. But unlike the\nlightning it remained. Let the manifestation of God come how or when\nit may, it is decisive. The man into whose soul the Almighty has\nspoken His _I AM_, can never be the same afterwards. He may forget;\nhe may deny it: but he has _known God_; he has seen the light of\nlife. If he returns to darkness, his darkness is blacker and guiltier\nthan before. On his brow there rests in all its sadness \"Sorrow's\ncrown of sorrow, remembering happier things.\"\n\nOffences venial, excusable hitherto, from this time assume a graver\nhue. Things that in a lower stage of life were innocent, and even\npossessed religious value, may now be unlawful, and the practice of\nthem a declension, the first step in apostasy. What is delightful in\na child, becomes folly in a grown man. The knowledge of God in Christ\nhas raised us in the things of the spirit to man's estate, and it\nrequires that we should \"put away childish things,\" and amongst them\nritual display and sacerdotal officiations, Pagan, Jewish, or Romish.\nThese things form no part of the knowledge of God, or of the \"true\nworship of the Father.\"\n\nThe Jewish \"rudiments\" were designed for men who had not known God as\nChrist declares Him, who had never seen the Saviour's cross. Jewish\nsaints could not worship God in the Spirit of adoption. They remained\nunder the spirit of servitude and fear. Their conceptions were so\nfar \"weak and poor\" that they supposed the Divine favour to depend\non such matters as the \"washing of cups and pots,\" and the precise\nnumber of feet that one walked on the Sabbath. These ideas belonged\nto a childish stage of the religious life. Pharisaism had developed\nto the utmost this lower element of the Mosaic system, at the expense\nof everything that was spiritual in it. Men who had been brought up\nin Judaism might indeed, after conversion to Christ, retain their old\ncustoms as matters of social usage or pious habit, without regarding\nthem as vital to religion. With Gentiles it was otherwise. Adopting\nJewish rites _de novo_, they must do so on grounds of distinct\nreligious necessity. For this very reason the duty of circumcision\nwas pressed upon them. It was a means, they were told, essential\nto their spiritual perfection, to the attainment of full Christian\nprivileges. But to know God by the witness of the Holy Spirit of\nChrist, as the Galatians had done, was an experience sufficient to\nshow that this \"persuasion\" was false. It did not \"come of Him that\ncalled them.\" It introduced them to a path the opposite of that they\nhad entered at their conversion, a way that led downwards and not\nupwards, from the spiritual to the sensuous, from the salvation of\nfaith to that of self-wrought work of law.\n\n\"Known God,\" Paul says,--\"or rather _were known of God_.\" He hastens\nto correct himself. He will not let an expression pass that seems to\nascribe anything simply to human acquisition. \"Ye have not chosen\nMe,\" said Jesus; \"I have chosen you.\" So the Apostle John: \"Not that\nwe loved God, but that He loved us.\" This is true through the entire\nrange of the Christian life. \"We apprehend that for which we were\napprehended by Christ Jesus.\" Our love, our knowledge--what are they\nbut the sense of the Divine love and knowledge in us? Religion is a\nbestowment, not an achievement. It is \"God working in us to will and\nwork for the sake of His good pleasure.\" In this light the gospel\npresented itself at first to the Galatians. The preaching of the\nApostle, the vision of the cross of Christ, made them sensible of\nGod's living presence. They felt the gaze of an Infinite purity and\ncompassion, of an All-wise, All-pitiful Father, fixed upon them. He\nwas calling them, slaves of idolatry and sin, \"into the fellowship\nof His Son Jesus Christ.\" The illuminating glance of God pierced to\ntheir inmost being. In that light God and the soul met, and knew each\nother.\n\nAnd now, after this profound, transforming revelation, this sublime\ncommunion with God, will they turn back to a life of puerile\nformalities, of slavish dependence and fear? Is the strength of their\ndevotion to be spent, its fragrance exhaled in the drudgery of legal\nservice? Surely they know God better than to think that He requires\nthis. And He who knew them, as they have proved, and knows what was\nright and needful for them, has imposed no such burden. He granted\nthem the rich gifts of His grace--the Divine sonship, the heavenly\nheirship--on terms of mere faith in Christ, and without legal\nstipulation of any kind. Is it not enough that God knows them, and\ncounts them for His children!\n\nSo knowing, and so known, let them be content. Let them seek only\nto keep themselves in the love of God, and in the comfort of His\nSpirit. Raised to this high level, they must not decline to a lower.\nTheir heathen \"rudiments\" were excusable before; but now even Jewish\n\"rudiments\" are things to be left behind.\n\nII. It further appears that the Apostle saw _an element existing in\nJudaism common to it with the ethnic religions_. For he says that his\nreaders, formerly \"enslaved to idols,\" are \"now _turning back_ to the\nweak and beggarly rudiments, to which they would fain be in bondage\n_over again_.\"\n\n\"The rudiments\" of ver. 9 cannot, without exegetical violence,\nbe detached from \"the rudiments of the world\" of ver. 3. And\nthese latter plainly signify the Judaic rites (see Chapter XVI.).\nThe Judaistic practices of the Galatians were, Paul declares, a\n_backsliding toward their old idolatries_. We can only escape this\nconstruction of the passage at the cost of making the Apostle's\nremonstrance inconsequent and pointless. The argument of the letter\nhitherto has been directed with concentrated purpose against Judaic\nconformity. To suppose that just at this point, in making its\napplication, he turns aside without notice or explanation to an\nentirely different matter, is to stultify his reasoning. The only\nground for referring the \"days and seasons\" of ver. 10 to any other\nthan a Jewish origin, lies in the apprehension that such reference\ndisparages the Christian Sabbath.\n\nBut how, we ask, was it possible for Paul to use language which\nidentifies the revered law of God with rites of heathenism, which he\naccounted a \"fellowship with demons\"? Bishop Lightfoot has answered\nthis question in words we cannot do better than quote: \"The Apostle\nregards the higher element in heathen religion as corresponding,\nhowever imperfectly, to the lower in the Mosaic law. For we may\nconsider both the one and the other as made up of two component\nparts, the _spiritual_ and the _ritualistic_. Now viewed in their\n_spiritual_ aspect, there is no comparison between the one and the\nother. In this respect the heathen religions, so far as they added\nanything of their own to that sense of dependence on God which is\ninnate in man and which they could not entirely crush, were wholly\nbad. On the contrary, in the Mosaic law the spiritual element was\nmost truly divine. But this does not enter into our reckoning\nhere. For Christianity has appropriated all that was spiritual in\nits predecessor.... The _ritualistic_ element alone remains to be\nconsidered, and here is the meeting-point of Judaism and Heathenism.\nIn Judaism this was as much lower than its spiritual element, as\nin Heathenism it was higher. Hence the two systems approach within\nsuch a distance that they can, under certain limitations, be classed\ntogether. They have at least so much in common that a lapse into\nJudaism can be regarded as a relapse into the position of unconverted\nHeathenism. Judaism was a system of bondage like Heathenism.\nHeathenism had been a disciplinary training like Judaism\" (Commentary\n_in loc._).\n\nThis line of explanation may perhaps be carried a step further.\nJudaism was rudimentary throughout. A religion so largely ritualistic\ncould not but be spiritually and morally defective. In its partial\napprehension of the Divine attributes, its limitation of God's grace\nto a single people, its dim perception of immortality, there were\ngreat deficiencies in the Jewish creed. Its ethical code, moreover,\nwas faulty; it contained \"precepts given for the hardness of men's\nhearts\"--touching, for example, the laws of marriage, and the right\nof revenge. There was not a little in Judaism, especially in its\nPharisaic form, that belonged to a half-awakened conscience, to a\nrude and sensuous religious faculty. Christ came to \"fulfil the\nlaw;\" but in that fulfilment He did not shrink from correcting\nit. He emended the letter of its teaching, that its true spirit\nmight be elicited. For an enlightened Christian who had learned of\nJesus the \"royal law, the law of liberty,\" to conform to Judaism\nwas unmistakably to \"turn back.\" Moreover, it was just the weakest\nand least spiritual part of the system of Moses that the legalist\nteachers inculcated on Gentile Christians; while their own lives fell\nshort of its moral requirements (ch. vi. 12).\n\nMosaism had been in the days of its inspiration and creative vigour\nthe great opponent of idolatry. It was the Lord's witness throughout\nlong centuries of heathen darkness and oppression, and by its\ntestimony has rendered splendid service to God and man. But from the\nstandpoint of Christianity a certain degree of resemblance begins\nto be seen underlying this antagonism. The faith of the Israelitish\npeople combatted idolatry with weapons too much like its own. A\nworldly and servile element remained in it. To one who has advanced\nin front, positions at an earlier stage of his progress lying apart\nand paths widely divergent now assume the same general direction. To\nresort either to Jewish or heathen rites, meant _to turn back from\nChrist_. It was to adopt principles of religion obsolete and unfit\nfor those who had known God through Him. What in its time and for its\npurpose was excellent, nay indispensable, in doctrine and in worship,\nin time also had \"decayed and waxed old.\" To tie the living spirit of\nChristianity to dead forms is to tie it to corruption.\n\n\"Weak and beggarly rudiments\"--it is a hard sentence; and yet what\nelse were Jewish ceremonies and rules of diet, in comparison with\n\"righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost\"? What was\ncircumcision, now that there was no longer \"Jew and Greek?\" What\nwas there in Saturday more than in any other day of the week, if it\nceased to be a sign between the Lord of the Sabbath and His people?\nThese things were, as Paul saw them, the cast-clothes of religion.\nFor Gentile Christians the history of the Jewish ordinances had\nmuch instruction; but their observance was no whit more binding\nthan that of heathen ceremonies. Even in the ancient times God\nvalued them only as they were the expression of a devout, believing\nspirit. \"Your new moons and your appointed feasts,\" He had said\nto an ungodly generation, \"My soul hateth\" (Isa. i. 14). And was\nHe likely to accept them now, when they were enforced by ambition\nand party-spirit, at the expense of His Church's peace; when their\nobservance turned men's thoughts away from faith in His Son, and in\nthe power of His life-giving Spirit? There is nothing too severe,\ntoo scornful for Paul to say of these venerable rites of Israel, now\nthat they stand in the way of a living faith and trammel the freedom\nof the sons of God. He tosses them aside as the swaddling-bands of\nthe Church's infancy--childish fetters, too weak to hold the limbs\nof grown men. \"He brake in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had\nmade; for the children of Israel did burn incense to it; and he\ncalled it _Nehushtan--a piece of brass_\" (2 Kings xviii. 4). Brave\nHezekiah! Paul does the same with the whole ceremonial of Moses.\n\"Beggarly rudiments,\" he says. What divine refreshment there is in\na blast of wholesome scorn! It was their traditions, their ritual\nthat the Judaists worshipped, not the Holy One of Israel. \"They\nwould compass sea and land to make one proselyte,\" and then \"make\nhim twofold more the child of hell than themselves.\" This was the\nonly result that the success of the Judaistic agitation could have\nachieved.\n\nIn thus decrying Jewish ordinances, the Apostle by implication\nallows a certain value to the rites of Paganism. The Galatians were\nformerly in bondage to \"them that are no gods.\" Now, he says, they\nare turning _again_ to the like servitude by conforming to Mosaic\nlegalism. They wish to come _again_ under subjection to \"the weak and\npoor rudiments.\" In Galatian heathenism Paul appears to recognise\n\"rudiments\" of truth and a certain preparation for Christianity.\nWhile Judaic rites amounted to no more than rudiments of a spiritual\nfaith, there were influences at work in Paganism that come under the\nsame category. Paul believed that \"God had not left Himself without\nwitness to any.\" He never treated heathen creeds with indiscriminate\ncontempt, as though they were utterly corrupt and worthless. Witness\nhis address to the \"religious\" Athenians, and to the wild people\nof Lycaonia (Acts xiv. 15-17; xvii. 22-31). He finds his text in\n\"certain of your own (heathen) poets.\" He appeals to the sense\nof a Divine presence \"not far from any one of us;\" and declares\nthat though God was \"unknown\" to the nations, they were under His\nguidance and were \"feeling after Him.\" To this extent Paul admits\na _Preparatio evangelica_ in the Gentile world; he would have been\nprepared, with Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and with modern\nstudents of comparative religion, to trace in the poets and wise men\nof Greece, in the lawgivers of Rome, in the mystics of the East,\npresentiments of Christianity, ideas and aspirations that pointed to\nit as their fulfilment. The human race was not left in total darkness\nbeyond the range of the light shining on Zion's hill. The old Pagans,\n\"suckled in a creed outworn,\" were not altogether God-forsaken. They\ntoo, amid darkness like the shadow of death, had \"glimpses that might\nmake them less forlorn.\" And so have the heathen still. We must not\nsuppose either that revealed religion was perfect from the beginning;\nor that the natural religions were altogether without fragments and\nrudiments of saving truth.\n\n\"Days you are scrupulously keeping, and months, and seasons, and\nyears,\"--the weekly sabbath, the new moon, the annual festivals,\nthe sacred seventh year, the round of the Jewish Kalendar. On these\nmatters the Galatians had, as it seems, already fallen in with the\ndirections of the Jewish teachers. The word by which the Apostle\ndescribes their practice, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5, denotes, besides the fact,\nthe manner and spirit of the observance--an _assiduous, anxious\nattention_, such as the spirit of legal exaction dictated. These\nprescriptions the Galatians would the more readily adopt, because\nin their heathen life they were accustomed to stated celebrations.\nThe Pagan Kalendar was crowded with days sacred to gods and divine\nheroes. This resemblance justified Paul all the more in taxing them\nwith relapsing towards heathenism.\n\nThe Church of later centuries, both in its Eastern and Western\nbranch, went far in the same direction. It made the keeping of\nholy days a prominent and obligatory part of Christianity; it has\nmultiplied them superstitiously and beyond all reason. Amongst the\nrest it incorporated heathen festivals, too little changed by their\nconsecration.\n\nPaul's remonstrance condemns in principle the enforcement of sacred\nseasons as things essential to salvation, in the sense in which the\nJewish Sabbath was the bond of the ancient Covenant. We may not place\neven the Lord's Day upon this footing. Far different from this is the\nunforced and grateful celebration of the First Day of the week, which\nsprang up in the Apostolic Church, and is assumed by the Apostles\nPaul and John (1 Cor. xvi. 2; Rev. i. 10). The rule of the seventh\nday's rest has so much intrinsic fitness, and has brought with it so\nmany benefits, that after it had been enforced by strict law in the\nJewish Church for so long, its maintenance could now be left, without\nexpress re-enactment, as a matter of freedom to the good sense and\nright feeling of Christian believers, \"sons of the resurrection.\"\nIts legislative sanction rests on grounds of public propriety and\nnational well-being, which need not to be asserted here. Wherever the\n\"Lord of the Sabbath\" rules, His Day will be gladly kept for His sake.\n\nThe Apostle in protecting Gentile liberties is no enemy to order in\nworship and outward life. No one can justly quote his authority in\nopposition to such appointments as a Christian community may make,\nfor reasons of expediency and decorum, in the regulation of its\naffairs. But he teaches that the essence of Christianity does not lie\nin things of this kind, not in questions of meat and drink, nor of\ntime and place. To put these details, however important in their own\norder, on a level with righteousness, mercy, and faith, is to bring\na snare upon the conscience; it is to introduce once more into the\nChurch the leaven of justification by works of law.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"Weak and poor\" the best forms of piety become, without inward\nknowledge of God. Liturgies, creeds and confessions, church music\nand architecture, Sundays, fasts, festivals, are beautiful things\nwhen they are the transcript of a living faith. When that is gone,\ntheir charm, their spiritual worth is gone. They no longer belong to\n_religion_; they have ceased to be a bond between the souls of men\nand God. \"According to our faith\"--our actual, not professional or\n\"confessional\" faith--\"it shall be done unto us\": such is the rule of\nChrist. To cling to formularies which have lost their meaning and to\nwhich the Spirit of truth gives no present witness, is a demoralising\nbondage.\n\nBut this is not the only, nor the commonest way in which the sons of\nGod are tempted to return to bondage. \"Whosoever _committeth sin_,\"\nChrist said, \"is the servant of sin.\" And the Apostle will have to\nwarn his readers that by their abuse of liberty, by their readiness\nto make it \"an occasion to the flesh,\" they were likely to forfeit\nit. \"They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh\" (ch. v. 24).\nThis warning must be balanced against the other. Our liberty from\noutward constraint should be still more a liberty from the dominion\nof self, from pride and desire and anger; or it is not the liberty\nof God's children. Inward servitude is after all the vilest and worst.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"You make me afraid,\" at last the Apostle is compelled to say, \"that\nI have laboured in vain.\" His enemies had caused him no such fear.\nWhile his children in the faith were true to him, he was afraid of\nnothing. \"Now we live,\" he says in one of his Epistles, \"if ye stand\nfast in the Lord!\" But if they should fall away? He trembles for\nhis own work, for these wayward children who had already caused him\nso many pangs. It is in a tone of the deepest solicitude that he\ncontinues his expostulation in the following paragraph.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII.\n\n_PAUL'S ENTREATY._\n\n \"I beseech you, brethren, be as I _am_, for I _am_ as ye _are_.\n Ye did me no wrong: but ye know that because of an infirmity of\n the flesh I preached the gospel unto you the first time: and\n that which was a temptation to you in my flesh ye despised not,\n nor rejected; but ye received me as an angel of God, _even_ as\n Christ Jesus. Where then is that gratulation of yourselves? for\n I bear you witness, that, if possible, ye would have plucked out\n your eyes and given them to me. So then am I become your enemy,\n because I tell you the truth? They zealously seek you in no good\n way; nay, they desire to shut you out, that ye may seek them.\n But it is good to be zealously sought in a good matter at all\n times, and not only when I am present with you,--my children, of\n whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you.[118]\n Yea, I could wish to be present with you now, and to change my\n voice; for I am perplexed about you.\"--GAL. iv. 12-20.\n\n [118] For the rendering of this clause, see the exposition which\n follows.\n\n\nThe reproof of the last paragraph ended in a sigh. To see Christ's\nfreemen relapsing into bondage, and exchanging their Divine\nbirthright for childish toys of ceremonial, what can be more\nsaddening and disappointing than this? Their own experience of\nsalvation, the Apostle's prayers and toils on their behalf, are, to\nall appearance, wasted on these foolish Galatians. One resource is\nstill left him. He has refuted and anathematized the \"other gospel.\"\nHe has done what explanation and argument can do to set himself right\nwith his readers, and to destroy the web of sophistry in which their\nminds had been entangled. He will now try to win them by a gentler\npersuasion. If reason and authority fail, \"for love's sake he will\nrather beseech\" them.\n\nHe had reminded them of their former idolatry; and this calls up\nto the Apostle's mind the circumstances of his first ministry in\nGalatia. He sees himself once more a stranger amongst this strange\npeople, a traveller fallen sick and dependent on their hospitality,\npreaching a gospel with nothing to recommend it in the appearance\nof its advocate, and which the sickness delaying his journey had\ncompelled him, contrary to his intention, to proclaim amongst them.\nYet with what ready and generous hospitality they had received the\ninfirm Apostle! Had he been an angel from heaven--nay, the Lord\nJesus Himself, they could scarcely have shown him more attention\nthan they did. His physical weakness, which would have moved the\ncontempt of others, called forth their sympathies. However severely\nhe may be compelled to censure them, however much their feelings\ntoward him have changed, he will never forget the kindness he then\nreceived. Surely they cannot think him their enemy, or allow him to\nbe supplanted by the unworthy rivals who are seeking their regard. So\nPaul pleads with his old friends, and seeks to win for his arguments\na way to their hearts through the affection for himself which he fain\nhopes is still lingering there.\n\n_Hoc prudentis est pastoris_, Calvin aptly says. But there is more in\nthis entreaty than a calculated prudence. It is a cry of the heart.\nPaul's soul is in the pangs of travail (ver. 19). We have seen the\nsternness of his face relax while he pursues his mighty argument. As\nhe surveys the working of God's counsel in past ages, the promise\ngiven to Abraham for all nations, the intervening legal discipline,\nthe coming of Christ in the fulness of time, the bursting of the\nancient bonds, the sending forth of the Spirit of adoption--and\nall this for the sake of these Galatian Gentiles, and then thinks\nhow they are after all declining from grace and renouncing their\nDivine inheritance, the Apostle's heart aches with grief. Foolish,\nfickle as they have proved, they are his children. He will \"travail\nover them in birth a second time,\" if \"Christ may yet be formed in\nthem.\" Perhaps he has written too harshly. He half repents of his\nseverity.[119] Fain would he \"change his voice.\" If he could only\n\"be with them,\" and see them face to face, haply his tears, his\nentreaties, would win them back. A rush of tender emotion wells up\nin Paul's soul. All his relentings are stirred. He is no longer the\nmaster in Christ rebuking unfaithful disciples; he is the mother\nweeping over her misguided sons.\n\n [119] Comp. 2 Cor. ii. 4; vii. 8.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThere are considerable difficulties in the exegesis of this passage.\nWe note them in succession as they arise:--(1) In ver. 12 we prefer,\nwith Meyer and Lightfoot, to read, \"Be as I, for I _became_ (rather\nthan _am_) as you--brethren, I beseech you.\" The verses preceding and\nfollowing both suggest the past tense in the ellipsis. Paul's memory\nis busy. He appeals to the \"auld lang syne.\" He reminds the Galatians\nof what he \"had been amongst them for their sake,\"[120] how he then\nbehaved in regard to the matters in dispute. He assumed no airs of\nJewish superiority. He did not separate himself from his Gentile\nbrethren by any practice in which they could not join. He \"became\nas they,\" placing himself by their side on the ground of a common\nChristian faith. He asks for reciprocity, for \"a recompense in like\nkind\" (2 Cor. vi. 13). Are they going to set themselves above their\nApostle, to take their stand on that very ground of Mosaic privilege\nwhich he had abandoned for their sake? He implores them not to do\nthis thing. The beseechment, in the proper order of the words, comes\nin at the close of the sentence, with a pathetic emphasis. He makes\nhimself a suppliant. \"I beg you,\" he says, \"by our old affection, by\nour brotherhood in Christ, not to desert me thus.\"\n\n [120] Comp. 1 Thess. i. 5; ii. 7, 8.\n\n(2) Suddenly Paul turns to another point, according to his wont in\nthis emotional mood: \"There is nothing in which you have wronged me.\"\nIs he contradicting some allegation which had helped to estrange the\nGalatians? Had some one been saying that Paul was affronted by their\nconduct, and was actuated by personal resentment? In that case we\nshould have looked for a specific explanation and rebutment of the\ncharge. Rather he is anticipating the thought that would naturally\narise in the minds of his readers at this point. \"Paul is asking us,\"\nthey would say, \"to let bygones be bygones, to give up this Judaistic\nattachment for his sake, and to meet him frankly on the old footing.\nBut supposing we try to do so, he is very angry with us, as this\nletter shows; _he thinks we have treated him badly_; he will always\nhave a grudge against us. Things can never be again as they were\nbetween ourselves and him.\"\n\nSuch feelings often arise upon the breach of an old friendship, to\nprevent the offending party from accepting the proffered hand of\nreconciliation. Paul's protest removes this hindrance. He replies,\n\"I have no sense of injury, no personal grievance against _you_. It\nis impossible I should cherish ill-will towards you. You know how\nhandsomely you treated me when I first came amongst you. Nothing can\nefface from my heart the recollection of that time. You must not\nthink that I hate you, because I tell you the truth\" (ver. 16).\n\n(3) \"Because of an infirmity of the flesh\" (physical weakness), is\nthe truer rendering of ver. 13; and \"your temptation in my flesh\" the\ngenuine reading of ver. 14, restored by the Revisers. Sickness had\narrested the Apostle's course during his second missionary tour, and\ndetained him in the Galatic country. So that he had not only \"been\nwith\" the Galatians \"in weakness,\" as afterwards when during the same\njourney he preached at Corinth (1 Cor. ii. 3); but actually \"_because\nof_ weakness.\" His infirmities gave him occasion to minister there,\nwhen he had intended to pass them by.\n\nPaul had no thought of evangelizing Galatia; another goal was in\nview. It was patent to them--indeed he confessed as much at the\ntime--that if he had been able to proceed, he would not have lingered\nin their country. This was certainly an unpromising introduction.\nAnd the Apostle's state of health made it at that time a trial for\nany one to listen to him. There was something in the nature of his\nmalady to excite contempt, even loathing for his person. \"That which\ntried you in my flesh, ye did not _despise_, nor _spit out_:\" such\nis Paul's vivid phrase. How few men would have humility enough to\nrefer to a circumstance of this kind; or could do so without loss of\ndignity. He felt that the condition of the messenger might well have\nmoved this Galatian people to derision, rather than to reverence for\nhis message.\n\nAt the best Paul's appearance and address were none of the most\nprepossessing.[121] The \"ugly little Jew\" M. Renan calls him,\nrepeating the taunts of his Corinthian contemners. His sickness\nin Galatia, connected, it would appear, with some constitutional\nweakness, from which he suffered greatly during his second and\nthird missionary tours, assumed a humiliating as well as a painful\nform. Yet this \"thorn in the flesh,\" a bitter trial assuredly to\nhimself,[122] had proved at once a trial and a blessing to his\nunintended hearers in Galatia.\n\n [121] 1 Cor. ii. 3; 2 Cor. iv. 7; x. 1, 10; xi. 6.\n\n [122] Comp. 2 Cor. xii. 7-10, referring apparently to the first\n outbreak of this mysterious affliction.\n\n(4) So far from taking offence at Paul's unfortunate condition,\nthey welcomed him with enthusiasm. They \"blessed themselves\" that\nhe had come (ver. 15). They said one to another, \"How fortunate we\nare in having this good man amongst us! What a happy thing for us\nthat Paul's sickness obliged him to stay and give us the opportunity\nof hearing his good news!\" Such was their former \"gratulation.\" The\nregard they conceived for the sick Apostle was unbounded. \"For I bear\nyou witness,\" he says, \"that, if possible, you would have _dug out\nyour eyes_ and given them me!\"\n\nIs this no more than a strong hyperbole, describing the almost\nextravagant devotion which the Galatians expressed to the Apostle?\nOr are we to read the terms more literally? So it has been sometimes\nsupposed. In this expression some critics have discovered a clue\nto the nature of Paul's malady. The Galatians, as they read the\nsentence, wished they could have taken out their own eyes and given\nthem to Paul, _in place of his disabled ones_. This hypothesis,\nit is argued, agrees with other circumstances of the case and gives\nshape to a number of scattered intimations touching the same subject.\nInfirmity of the eyes would explain the \"large characters\" of Paul's\nhandwriting (ch. vi. 11), and his habit of using an amanuensis. It\nwould account for his ignorance of the person of the High Priest at\nhis trial in Jerusalem (Acts xxiii. 2-5). The blindness that struck\nhim on the way to Damascus may have laid the foundation of a chronic\naffection of this kind, afterwards developed and aggravated by the\nhardships of his missionary life. And such an affliction would\ncorrespond to what is said respecting the \"thorn\" of 2 Cor. xii. 7,\nand the \"temptation\" of this passage. For it would be excessively\npainful, and at the same time disabling and disfiguring in its\neffects.\n\nThis conjecture has much to recommend it. But it finds a very\nprecarious support in the text. Paul does not say, \"You would have\nplucked out _your own_ (A.V.) eyes and given them _me_,\" as though\nhe were thinking of an exchange of eyes; but, \"You would have\nplucked out your _eyes_ and given them me\"--as much as to say, \"You\nwould have done anything in the world for me then,--even taken out\nyour eyes and given them to me.\"[123] In the phrase \"dug out\" we\nmay detect a touch of irony. This was the genuine Galatian style.\nThe Celtic temperament loves to launch itself out in vehemencies\nand flourishes of this sort. These ardent Gauls had been perfectly\nenraptured with Paul. They lavished upon him their most exuberant\nmetaphors. They said these things in all sincerity; he \"bears them\nrecord\" to this. However cool they have become since, they were\ngushing enough and to spare in their affection towards him then. And\nnow have they \"so quickly\" turned against him? Because he crosses\ntheir new fancies and tells them unwelcome truths, they rush to the\nopposite extreme and even think him their enemy!\n\n [123] Comp. Matt. xviii. 9.\n\n(5) Suddenly the Apostle turns upon his opposers (ver. 17). The\nJudaizers had disturbed his happy relations with his Galatian\nflock; they had made them half believe that he was their enemy.\nThe Galatians must choose between Paul and his traducers. Let them\nscrutinise the motives of these new teachers. Let them call to mind\nthe claims of their father in Christ. \"They are courting you,\" he\nsays,--\"these present suitors for your regard--dishonourably; they\nwant to shut you out and have you to themselves, that you may pay\ncourt to them.\" They pretend to be zealous for your interests; but it\nis their own they seek (ch. vi. 12).\n\nSo far the Apostle's meaning is tolerably clear. But ver. 18 is\nobscure. It may be construed in either of two ways, as _Paul_ or _the\nGalatians_ are taken for the subject glanced at in the verb _to be\ncourted_ in its first clause: \"But it is honourable to be courted\nalways in an honourable way, and not only when I am present with\nyou.\" Does Paul mean that he has no objection to the Galatians making\nother friends in his absence? or, that he thinks they ought not to\nforget him in his absence? The latter, as we think. The Apostle\ncomplains of their inconstancy towards himself. This is a text for\nfriends and lovers. Where attachment is honourable, it should be\nlasting. \"Set me as a seal upon thine heart,\" says the Bride of the\nSong of Songs. With the Galatians it seemed to be, \"Out of sight, out\nof mind.\" They allowed Paul to be pushed out by scheming rivals.\nHe was far away; they were on the spot. He told them the truth; the\nJudaizers flattered them. So their foolish heads were turned. They\nwere positively \"bewitched\" by these new admirers; and preferred\ntheir sinister and designing compliments to Paul's sterling honour\nand proved fidelity.\n\nThe connection of vv. 17, 18 turns on the words _honourable_ and\n_court_,[124] each of which is thrice repeated. There is a kind of\nplay on the verb \u03b6\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03c9. In ver. 18 it implies a true, in ver. 17 a\ncounterfeit affection (an affectation). Paul might have said, \"It is\ngood one should be _loved, followed with affection, always_,\" but for\nthe sake of the verbal antithesis. In ver. 17 he taxes his opponents\nwith unworthily courting the favour of the Galatians; in ver. 18\nhe intimates his grief that he himself in his absence is no longer\ncourted by them.\n\n [124] \u0396\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03c9, _to have zeal_ towards a person or thing, _to\n affect_ (A.V.: in its older English sense of _seeking_, _paying\n regard to any one_).\n\n(6) In the next verse this grief of wounded affection, checked at\nfirst by a certain reserve, breaks out uncontrollably: \"My children,\nfor whom again I am in travail, till Christ be formed in you!\"[125]\nThis outcry is a pathetic continuance of his expostulation. He cannot\nbear the thought of losing these children of his heart. He stretches\nout his arms to them. Tears stream from his eyes. He has been\nspeaking in measured, almost playful terms, in comparing himself with\nhis supplanters. But the possibility of their success, the thought of\nthe mischief going on in Galatia and of the little power he has to\nprevent it, wrings his very soul. He feels a mother's pangs for his\nimperilled children, as he writes these distressful words.\n\n [125] The _full stop_ placed in the English Version at the end of\n ver. 18, on this view, is out of place.\n\nThere is nothing gained by substituting \"little children\" (John's\nphrase) for \"children,\" everywhere else used by Paul, and attested\nhere by the best witnesses. The sentiment is that of 1 Thess. ii. 7,\n8; 1 Cor. iv. 14-16. The Apostle is not thinking of the littleness\nor feebleness of the Galatians, but simply of their relation to\nhimself. His sorrow is the sorrow of bereavement. \"You have not many\n_mothers_,\" he seems to say: \"I have travailed over you in birth;\nand now a second time you bring on me a mother's pains, which I must\nendure until Christ is formed in you and His image is renewed in your\nsouls.\"\n\n * * * * *\n\nPaul stands before us as an injured friend, a faithful minister\nof Christ robbed of his people's love. He is wounded in his\ntenderest affections. For the sake of the Gentile Churches he had\ngiven up everything in life that he prized (ver. 12; 1 Cor. ix.\n21); he had exposed himself to the contempt and hatred of his\nfellow-countrymen--and this is his reward, \"to be loved the less, the\nmore abundantly he loves!\" (2 Cor. xii. 15).\n\nBut if he is grieved at this defection, he is equally perplexed. He\ncannot tell what to make of the Galatians, or in what tone to address\nthem. He has warned, denounced, argued, protested, pleaded as a\nmother with her children; still he doubts whether he will prevail. If\nhe could only see them and meet them as in former days, laying aside\nthe distance, the sternness of authority which he has been forced\nto assume, he might yet reach their hearts. At least he would know\nhow matters really stand, and in what language he ought to speak. So\nhis entreaty ends: \"I wish I could only be present with you now, and\nspeak in some different voice. For I am at a loss to know how to deal\nwith you.\"\n\nThis picture of estrangement and reproach tells its own tale, when\nits lines have once been clearly marked. We may dwell, however, a\nlittle longer on some of the lessons which it teaches:--\n\nI. In the first place, it is evident that _strong emotions and warm\naffections are no guarantee for the permanence of religious life_.\n\nThe Galatians resembled the \"stony ground\" hearers of our Lord's\nparable,--\"such as hear the word, and immediately with joy receive\nit; but they have no root in themselves; they believe for a time.\"\nIt was not \"persecution\" indeed that \"offended\" them; but flattery\nproved equally effectual. They were of the same fervid temper as\nPeter on the night of the Passion, when he said, \"Though I should\ndie with Thee, yet will I not deny Thee in anywise,\"--within a few\nhours thrice denying his Master, with \"oaths and curses.\" They\nlacked seriousness and depth. They had fine susceptibilities and a\nlarge fund of enthusiasm; they were full of eloquent protestations;\nand under excitement were capable of great efforts and sacrifices.\nBut there was a flaw in their nature. They were creatures of\nimpulse--soon hot, soon cold. One cannot help liking such people--but\nas for _trusting_ them, that is a different matter.\n\nNothing could be more delightful or promising than the appearance\nthese Churches presented in the early days of their conversion. They\nheard the Apostle's message with rapt attention; they felt its Divine\npower, so strangely contrasting with his physical feebleness. They\nwere amazingly wrought upon. The new life in Christ kindled all the\nfervour of their passionate nature. How they triumphed in Christ!\nHow they blessed the day when the gospel visited their land! They\nalmost worshipped the Apostle. They could not do enough for him.\nTheir hearts bled for his sufferings. Where are all these transports\nnow? Paul is far away. Other teachers have come, with \"another\ngospel.\" And the cross is already forgotten! They are contemplating\ncircumcision; they are busy studying the Jewish ritual, making\narrangements for feast-days and \"functions\", eagerly discussing\npoints of ceremony. Their minds are poisoned with mistrust of their\nown Apostle, whose heart is ready to break over their folly and\nfrivolity. All this for the want of a little reflection, for want of\nthe steadiness of purpose without which the most genial disposition\nand the most ardent emotions inevitably run to waste. Their faith had\nbeen too much a matter of feeling, too little of principle.\n\nII. Further, we observe _how prone are those who have put themselves\nin the wrong to fix the blame on others_.\n\nThe Apostle was compelled in fidelity to truth to say hard things\nto his Galatian disciples. He had previously, on his last visit,\ngiven them a solemn warning on account of their Judaic proclivities\n(ch. i. 9). In this Epistle he censures them roundly. He wonders at\nthem; he calls them \"senseless Galatians\"; he tells them they are\nwithin a step of being cut off from Christ (ch. v. 4). And now they\ncry out, \"Paul is our enemy. If he cared for us, how could he write\nso cruelly! We were excessively fond of him once, we could not do\ntoo much for him; but that is all over now. If we had inflicted on\nhim some great injury, he could scarcely treat us more roughly.\"\nThoughtless and excitable people commonly reason in this way.\nPersonalities with them take the place of argument and principle.\nThe severity of a holy zeal for truth is a thing they can never\nunderstand. If you disagree with them and oppose them, they put it\ndown to some petty animosity. They credit you with a private grudge\nagainst them; and straightway enroll you in the number of their\nenemies, though you may be in reality their best friend. Flatter\nthem, humour their vanity, and you have them at your bidding. Such\nmen it is the hardest thing in the world honestly to serve. They will\nalways prefer \"the kisses of an enemy\" to the faithful \"wounds of a\nfriend.\"\n\nIII. Men of the Galatian type are _the natural prey of self-seeking\nagitators_. However sound the principles in which they were trained,\nhowever true the friendships they have enjoyed, they must have\nchange. The accustomed palls upon them. Giddy Athenians, they love\nnothing so much as \"to hear and tell some new thing.\" They ostracize\nAristides, simply because they are \"tired of hearing him always\ncalled the Just.\" To hear \"the same things,\" however \"safe\" it may\nbe, even from an Apostle's lips is to them intolerably \"grievous.\"\nThey never think earnestly and patiently enough to find the deeper\nsprings, the fresh delight and satisfaction lying hidden in the great\nunchanging truths. These are they who are \"carried about with divers\nand strange doctrines,\" who run after the newest thing in ritualistic\nart, or sensational evangelism, or well-spiced heterodoxy. Truth\nand plain dealing, apostolic holiness and godly sincerity, are\noutmatched in dealing with them by the craft of worldly wisdom. A\nlittle judicious flattery, something to please the eye and catch the\nfancy--and they are persuaded to believe almost anything, or to deny\nwhat they have most earnestly believed.\n\nWhat had the Legalists to offer compared with the gifts bestowed\non these Churches through Paul? What was there that could make them\nrivals to him in character or spiritual power? And yet the Galatians\nflock round the Judaist teachers, and accept without inquiry their\nslanders and perversions of the gospel; while the Apostle, their true\nfriend and father, too true to spare their faults, stands suspected,\nalmost deserted. He must forsooth implore them to come down from the\nheights of their would-be legal superiority, and to meet him on the\ncommon ground of grace and saving faith. The sheep will not hear\ntheir shepherd's voice; they follow strangers, though they be thieves\nand hirelings. \"O foolish Galatians!\"\n\n * * * * *\n\nWhether the Apostle's entreaty prevailed to recall them or did not,\nwe cannot tell. From the silence with which these Churches are passed\nover in the Acts of the Apostles, and the little that is heard of\nthem afterwards, an unfavourable inference appears probable. The\nJudaistic leaven, it is to be feared, went far to leaven the whole\nlump. Paul's apprehensions were only too well-grounded. And these\nhopeful converts who had once \"run well,\" were fatally \"hindered\" and\nfell far behind in the Christian race. Such, in all likelihood, was\nthe result of the departure from the truth of the gospel into which\nthe Galatians allowed themselves to be drawn.\n\nWhatever was the sequel to this story, Paul's protest remains to\nwitness to the sincerity and tenderness of the great Apostle's\nsoul, and to the disastrous issues of the levity of character which\ndistinguished his Galatian disciples.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX.\n\n_THE STORY OF HAGAR._\n\n \"Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the\n law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the\n handmaid, and one by the freewoman. Howbeit the _son_ by the\n handmaid is born after the flesh; but the _son_ by the freewoman\n _is born_ through promise. Which things contain an allegory: for\n these _women_ are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing\n children unto bondage, which is Hagar. For Sinai is a mountain\n in Arabia, and answereth to the Jerusalem that now is: for she\n is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above\n is free, which is our mother. For it is written,\n\n Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not;\n Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not:\n For more are the children of the desolate than of her which\n hath the husband.\n\n Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But\n as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him _that\n was born_ after the Spirit, even so it is now. Howbeit what\n saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son; for\n the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of\n the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a\n handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did Christ set us\n free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke\n of bondage.\"--GAL. iv. 21-v. 1.\n\n\nThe Apostle wished that he could \"change his voice\" (ver. 20).\nIndeed he has changed it more than once. \"Any one who looks closely\nmay see that there is much change and alteration of feeling in\nwhat the Apostle has previously written\" (Theodorus). Now he will\ntry another tone; he proceeds in fact to address his readers in a\nstyle which we find nowhere else in his Epistles. He will tell his\n\"children\" a story! Perhaps he may thus succeed better than by graver\nargument. Their quick fancy will readily apprehend the bearing of the\nillustration; it may bring home to them the force of his doctrinal\ncontention, and the peril of their own position, as he fears they\nhave not seen them yet. And so, after the pathetic appeal of the last\nparagraph, and before he delivers his decisive, official protest\nto the Galatians against their circumcision, he interjects this\n\"allegory\" of the two sons of Abraham.\n\nPaul cites the history of _the sons of Abraham_. No other example\nwould have served his purpose. The controversy between himself\nand the Judaizers turned on the question, Who are the true heirs\nof Abraham? (ch. iii. 7, 16, 29). He made faith in Christ, they\ncircumcision and law-keeping, the ground of sonship. So the\ninheritance was claimed in a double sense. But now, if it should\nappear that this antithesis existed in principle in the bosom of the\npatriarchal family, if we should find that there was an elder son of\nAbraham's flesh opposed to the child of promise, how powerfully will\nthis analogy sustain the Apostle's position. Judaism will then be\nseen to be playing over again the part of Ishmael; and \"the Jerusalem\nthat now is\" takes the place of Hagar, the slave-mother. The moral\nsituation created by the Judaic controversy had been rehearsed in the\nfamily life of Abraham.\n\n\"Tell me,\" the Apostle asks, \"you that would fain be subject to the\nlaw, do you not know what it relates concerning Abraham? He had two\nsons, one of free, and the other of servile birth. Do you wish to\nbelong to the line of Ishmael, or Isaac?\" In this way Paul resumes\nthe thread of his discourse dropped in ver. 7. Faith, he had told\nhis readers, had made them sons of God. They were, in Christ, of\nAbraham's spiritual seed, heirs of his promise. God had sent His Son\nto redeem them, and the Spirit of His Son to attest their adoption.\nBut they were not content. They were ambitious of Jewish privileges.\nThe Legalists persuaded them that they must be circumcised and\nconform to Moses, in order to be Abraham's children in full title.\n\"Very well,\" the Apostle says, \"you may become Abraham's sons in\nthis fashion. Only you must observe that Abraham had _two_ sons. And\nthe Law will make you his sons by Hagar, whose home is Sinai--not\nIsraelites, but _Ishmaelites_!\"\n\nPaul's Galatian allegory has greatly exercised the minds of his\ncritics. The word is one of ill repute in exegesis. _Allegory_\nwas the instrument of Rabbinical and Alexandrine Scripturists,\nan infallible device for extracting the predetermined sense from\nthe letter of the sacred text. The \"spiritualising\" of Christian\ninterpreters has been carried, in many instances, to equal excess\nof riot. For the honest meaning of the word of God anything and\neverything has been substituted that lawless fancy and verbal\ningenuity could read into it. The most arbitrary and grotesque\ndistortions of the facts of Scripture have passed current under cover\nof the clause, \"which things are an allegory.\" But Paul's allegory,\nand that of Philo and the Allegorical school, are very different\nthings, as widely removed as the \"words of truth and soberness\" from\nthe intoxications of a mystical idealism.\n\nWith Paul the spiritual sense of Scripture is based on the\nhistorical, is in fact the moral content and import thereof; for\nhe sees in history a continuous manifestation of God's will. With\nthe Allegorists the spiritual sense, arrived at by _\u00e0 priori_ means,\nreplaces the historical, destroyed to make room for it. The Apostle\npoints out in the story of Hagar a spiritual intent, such as exists\nin every scene of human life if we had eyes to see it, something\nother than the literal relation of the facts, but nowise alien from\nit. Here lies the difference between legitimate and illegitimate\nallegory. The utmost freedom may be given to this employment of the\nimagination, so long as it is true to the _moral_ of the narrative\nwhich it applies. In principle the Pauline allegory does not differ\nfrom the type. In the type the correspondence of the sign and thing\nsignified centres in a single figure or event; in such an allegory as\nthis it is extended to a group of figures and a series of events. But\nthe force of the application depends on the actuality of the original\nstory, which in the illicit allegory is matter of indifference.\n\n\"Which things are allegorized\"--so the Apostle literally writes\nin ver. 24--_made matters of allegory_. The phrase intimates, as\nBishop Lightfoot suggests, that the Hagarene episode in Genesis (ch.\nxvi., xxi. 1-21) was commonly interpreted in a figurative way. The\nGalatians had heard from their Jewish teachers specimens of this\npopular mode of exposition. Paul will employ it too; and will give\nhis own reading of the famous story of Ishmael and Isaac. Philo of\nAlexandria, the greatest allegorist of the day, has expounded the\nsame history. These eminent interpreters both make Sarah the mother\nof the spiritual, Hagar of the worldly offspring; both point out\nhow the barren is exalted over the fruitful wife. So far, we may\nimagine, Paul is moving on the accepted lines of Jewish exegesis.\nBut Philo knows nothing of the correspondence between Isaac and\n_Christ_, which lies at the back of the Apostle's allegory. And there\nis this vital difference of method between the two divines, that\nwhereas Paul's comparison is the illustration of a doctrine proved on\nother grounds--the painting which decorates the house already built\n(Luther)--with the Alexandrine idealist it forms the substance and\nstaple of his teaching.\n\nUnder this allegorical dress the Apostle expounds once more his\ndoctrine, already inculcated, of the difference between the Legal\nand Christian state. The former constitutes, as he now puts the\nmatter, a bastard sonship like that of Ishmael, conferring only an\nexternal and provisional tenure in the Abrahamic inheritance. It\nis contrasted with the spiritual sonship of the true Israel in the\nfollowing respects:--It is a state of _nature_ as opposed to grace;\nof _bondage_ as opposed to freedom; and further, it is _temporary_\nand soon to be ended by the Divine decree.\n\nI. \"He who is of the maid-servant is _after the flesh_; but he that\nis of the free-woman is through promise.... Just as then he that\nwas _after the flesh_ persecuted him that was after the Spirit, so\nnow\" (vv. 23, 29). The Apostle sees in the different parentage of\nAbraham's sons the ground of a radical divergence of character. One\nwas the child of nature, the other was the son of a spiritual faith.\n\nIshmael was in truth the fruit of unbelief; his birth was due to a\nnatural but impatient misreading of the promise. The patriarch's\nunion with Hagar was ill-assorted and ill-advised. It brought its\nnatural penalty by introducing an alien element into his family life.\nThe low-bred insolence which the serving-woman, in the prospect of\nbecoming a mother, showed toward the mistress to whom she owed her\npreferment, gave a foretaste of the unhappy consequences. The promise\nof posterity made to Abraham with a childless wife, was expressly\ndesigned to try his faith; and he had allowed it to be overborne\nby the reasonings of nature. It was no wonder that the son of the\nEgyptian slave, born under such conditions, proved to be of a lower\ntype, and had to be finally excluded from the house.\n\nIn Ishmael's relation to his father there was nothing but the\nordinary play of human motives. \"The son of the handmaid was born\nafter the flesh.\" He was a _natural_ son. But Ishmael was not on that\naccount cut off from the Divine mercies. Nor did his father's prayer,\n\"O that Ishmael might live before Thee\" (Gen. xvii. 18), remain\nunanswered. A great career was reserved by Divine Providence for his\nrace. The Arabs, the fiery sons of the desert, through him claim\ndescent from Abraham. They have carved their name deeply upon the\nhistory and the faith of the world. But sensuousness and lawlessness\nare everywhere the stamp of the Ishmaelite. With high gifts and some\ngenerous qualities, such as attracted to his eldest boy the love of\nAbraham, their fierce animal passion has been the curse of the sons\nof Hagar. Mohammedanism is a bastard Judaism; it is the religion of\nAbraham sensualised. Ishmael stands forth as the type of the carnal\nman. On outward grounds of flesh and blood he seeks inheritance in\nthe kingdom of God; and with fleshly weapons passionately fights its\nbattles.\n\nTo a similar position Judaism, in the Apostle's view, had now reduced\nitself. And to this footing the Galatian Churches would be brought if\nthey yielded to the Judaistic solicitations. To be circumcised would\nbe for them to be born again after the flesh, to link themselves\nto Abraham in the unspiritual fashion of Hagar's son. Ishmael was\nthe first to be circumcised (Gen. xvii. 23-26). It was to renounce\nsalvation by faith and the renewing of the Holy Spirit. This course\ncould only have one result. The Judaic ritualism they were adopting\nwould bear fruit after its kind, in a worldly, sensuous life. Like\nIshmael they would claim kinship with the Church of God on fleshly\ngrounds; and their claim must prove as futile as did his.\n\nThe persecution of the Church by Judaism gave proof of the Ishmaelite\nspirit, the carnal animus by which it was possessed. A religion\nof externalism naturally becomes repressive. It knows not \"the\ndemonstration of the Spirit\"; it has \"confidence in the flesh.\"\nIt relies on outward means for the propagation of its faith; and\nnaturally resorts to the secular arm. The Inquisition and the\nAuto-da-f\u00e9 are a not unfitting accompaniment of the gorgeous\nceremonial of the Mass. Ritualism and priestly autocracy go hand in\nhand. \"So now,\" says Paul, pointing to Ishmael's \"persecution\" of the\ninfant Isaac, hinted at in Gen. xxi. 8-10.\n\nThe laughter of Hagar's boy at Sarah's weaning-feast seems but a\nslight offence to be visited with the punishment of expulsion; and\nthe incident one beneath the dignity of theological argument. But\nthe principle for which Paul contends is there; and it is the more\neasily apprehended when exhibited on this homely scale. The family\nis the germ and the mirror of society. In it are first called\ninto play the motives which determine the course of history, the\nrise and fall of empires or churches. The gravamen of the charge\nagainst Ishmael lies in the last word of Gen. xxi. 9, rendered in\nthe Authorized Version _mocking_, and by the Revisers _playing_,\nafter the Septuagint and the Vulgate. This word in the Hebrew is\nevidently a play on the name _Isaac_, _i.e._, _laughter_, given by\nSarah to her boy with genial motherly delight (vv. 6, 7). Ishmael,\nnow a youth of fourteen, takes up the child's name and turns it, on\nthis public and festive occasion, into ridicule. Such an act was not\nonly an insult to the mistress of the house and the young heir at a\nmost untimely moment, it betrayed a jealousy and contempt on the part\nof Hagar's son towards his half-brother which gravely compromised\nIsaac's future. \"The wild, ungovernable and pugnacious character\nascribed to his descendants began to display itself in Ishmael,\nand to appear in language of provoking insolence; offended at the\ncomparative indifference with which he was treated, he indulged in\nmockery, especially against Isaac, whose very name furnished him with\nsatirical sneers.\"[126] Ishmael's jest cost him dear. The indignation\nof Sarah was reasonable; and Abraham was compelled to recognise in\nher demand the voice of God (vv. 10-12). The two boys, like Esau and\nJacob in the next generation, represented opposite principles and\nways of life, whose counterworking was to run through the course of\nfuture history. Their incompatibility was already manifest.\n\n [126] Kalisch, _Commentary_, on Genesis xxi. 9.\n\nThe Apostle's comparison must have been mortifying in the extreme\nto the Judaists. They are told in plain terms that they are in the\nposition of outcast Ishmael; while uncircumcised Gentiles, without\na drop of Abraham's blood in their veins, have received the\npromise forfeited by their unbelief. Paul could not have put his\nconclusion in a form more unwelcome to Jewish pride. But without this\nradical exposure of the legalist position it was impossible for him\nadequately to vindicate his gospel and defend his Gentile children in\nthe faith.\n\nII. From this contrast of birth \"according to flesh\" and \"through\npromise\" is deduced the opposition between _the slave-born and\nfree-born sons_. \"For these (the slave-mother and the free-woman) are\ntwo covenants, one indeed bearing children unto bondage--which is\nHagar\" (ver. 24). The other side of the antithesis is not formally\nexpressed; it is obvious. Sarah the princess, Abraham's true wife,\nhas her counterpart in the original covenant of promise renewed in\nChrist, and in \"the Jerusalem above, which is our mother\" (ver. 26).\nSarah is the typical mother,[127] as Abraham is the father of the\nchildren of faith. In the _systoichia_, or tabular comparison, which\nthe Apostle draws up after the manner of the schools, _Hagar_ and\n_the Mosaic covenant_, _Sinai_ and _the Jerusalem that now is_ stand\nin one file and \"answer to\" each other; _Sarah_ and _the Abrahamic\ncovenant_, _Zion_ and _the heavenly Jerusalem_ succeed in the same\norder, opposite to them. \"Zion\" is wanting in the second file; but\n\"Sinai and Zion\" form a standing antithesis (Heb. xii. 18-22); the\nsecond is implied in the first. It was to _Zion_ that the words of\nIsaiah cited in ver. 27, were addressed.\n\n [127] Comp. Heb. xi. 11, 12; 1 Pet. iii. 6.\n\nThe first clause of ver. 25 is best understood in the shorter,\nmarginal reading of the R. V., also preferred by Bishop Lightfoot\n(\u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03a3\u03b9\u03bd\u1fb6 \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03bd \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.). It is a parenthesis--\"for mount\nSinai[128] is in Arabia\"--_covenant_ running on in the mind from\nver. 24 as the continued subject of ver. 25 _b_: \"and it answereth\nto the present Jerusalem.\" This is the simplest and most consistent\nconstruction of the passage. The interjected geographical reference\nserves to support the identification of the Sinaitic covenant\nwith Hagar, _Arabia_ being the well-known abode of the Hagarenes.\nPaul had met them in his wanderings there. Some scholars have\nattempted to establish a verbal agreement between the name of the\nslave-mother and that locally given to the Sinaitic range; but this\nexplanation is precarious, and after all unnecessary. There was a\nreal correspondence between place and people on the one hand, as\nbetween place and covenant on the other. Sinai formed a visible and\nimposing link between the race of Ishmael and the Mosaic law-giving.\nThat awful, desolate mountain, whose aspect, as we can imagine, had\nvividly impressed itself on Paul's memory (ch. i. 17), spoke to him\nof bondage and terror. It was a true symbol of the working of the law\nof Moses, exhibited in the present condition of Judaism. And round\nthe base of Sinai Hagar's wild sons had found their dwelling.\n\n [128] Paul writes \"the _Sinai_ mountain\" (\u03c4\u1f78 \u03a3\u03b9\u03bd\u1fb6 \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2) in tacit\n opposition to the other, familiar _Mount Zion_ (Hofmann _in\n loc._). In Heb. xii. 22 the same inversion appears, with the same\n significance.\n\nJerusalem was no longer the mother of freemen. The boast, \"we are\nAbraham's sons; we were never in bondage\" (John viii. 33), was an\nunconscious irony. Her sons chafed under the Roman yoke. They were\nloaded with self-inflicted legal burdens. Above all, they were,\nnotwithstanding their professed law-keeping, enslaved to sin, in\nservitude to their pride and evil lusts. The spirit of the nation\nwas that of rebellious, discontented slaves. They were Ishmaelite\nsons of Abraham, with none of the nobleness, the reverence, the calm\nand elevated faith of their father. In the Judaism of the Apostle's\nday the Sinaitic dispensation, uncontrolled by the higher patriarchal\nand prophetic faith, had worked out its natural result. It \"gendered\nto bondage.\" A system of repression and routine, it had produced\nmen punctual in tithes of mint and anise, but without justice,\nmercy, or faith; vaunting their liberty while they were \"servants of\ncorruption.\" The law of Moses could not form a \"new creature.\" It\nleft the Ishmael of nature unchanged at heart, a child of the flesh,\nwith whatever robes of outward decorum his nakedness was covered. The\nPharisee was the typical product of law apart from grace. Under the\ngarb of a freeman he carried the soul of a slave.\n\nBut ver. 26 sounds the note of deliverance: \"The Jerusalem above\nis free; and she is our mother!\" Paul has escaped from the prison\nof Legalism, from the confines of Sinai; he has left behind the\nperishing earthly Jerusalem, and with it the bitterness and gloom of\nhis Pharisaic days. He is a citizen of the heavenly Zion, breathing\nthe air of a Divine freedom. The yoke is broken from the neck of\nthe Church of God; the desolation is gone from her heart. There\ncome to the Apostle's lips the words of the great prophet of the\nExile, depicting the deliverance of the spiritual Zion, despised and\ncounted barren, but now to be the mother of a numberless offspring.\nIn Isaiah's song, \"Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not\" (ch.\nliv.), the laughter of the childless Sarah bursts forth again, to\nbe gloriously renewed in the persecuted Church of Jesus. Robbed of\nall outward means, mocked and thrust out as she is by Israel after\nthe flesh, her rejection is a release, an emancipation. Conscious\nof the Spirit of sonship and freedom, looking out on the boundless\nconquests lying before her in the Gentile world, the Church of the\nNew Covenant glories in her tribulations. In Paul is fulfilled\nthe joy of prophet and psalmist, who sang in former days of gloom\nconcerning Israel's enlargement and world-wide victories. No legalist\ncould understand words like these. \"The veil\" was upon his heart \"in\nthe reading of the Old Testament.\" But with \"the Spirit of the Lord\"\ncomes \"liberty.\" The prophetic inspiration has returned. The voice of\nrejoicing is heard again in the dwellings of Israel. \"If the Son make\nyou free,\" said Jesus, \"ye shall be free indeed.\" This Epistle proves\nit.\n\nIII. \"And the bondman _abideth not in the house for ever_; the Son\nabideth for ever\" (John viii. 35). This also the Lord had testified:\nthe Apostle repeats His warning in the terms of this allegory.\n\nSooner or later the slave-boy was bound to go. He has no proper\nbirthright, no permanent footing in the house. One day he exceeds his\nlicence, he makes himself intolerable; he must begone. \"What saith\nthe Scripture? Cast out the maidservant and her son; for the son of\nthe maidservant shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman\"\n(ver. 30). Paul has pronounced the doom of Judaism. His words echo\nthose of Christ: \"Behold your house is left unto you desolate\" (Matt.\nxxiii. 38); they are taken up again in the language of Heb. xiii. 13,\n14, uttered on the eve of the fall of Jerusalem: \"Let us go forth\nunto Jesus without the camp, bearing His reproach. We have here no\ncontinuing city, but we seek that which is to come.\" On the walls\nof Jerusalem _ichabod_ was plainly written. Since it \"crucified our\nLord\" it was no longer the Holy City; it was \"spiritually Sodom and\nEgypt\" (Rev. xi. 8),--_Egypt_, the country of Hagar. Condemning Him,\nthe Jewish nation passed sentence on itself. They were slaves who in\nblind rage slew their Master when He came to free them.\n\nThe Israelitish people showed more than Ishmael's jealousy towards\nthe infant Church of the Spirit. No weapon of violence or calumny was\ntoo base to be used against it. The cup of their iniquity was filling\nfast. They were ripening for the judgement which Christ predicted\n(1 Thess. ii. 16). Year by year they became more hardened against\nspiritual truth, more malignant towards Christianity, and more\nfurious and fanatical in their hatred towards their civil rulers.\nThe cause of Judaism was hopelessly lost. In Rom. ix.-xi., written\nshortly after this Epistle, Paul assumes this as a settled thing,\nwhich he has to account for and to reconcile with Scripture. In the\ndemand of Sarah for the expulsion of her rival, complied with by\nAbraham against his will, the Apostle reads the secret judgement of\nthe Almighty on the proud city which he himself so ardently loved,\nbut which had crucified his Lord and repented not. \"Cut it down,\"\nJesus cried; \"why cumbereth it the ground?\" (Luke xiii. 7). The\nvoice of Scripture speaks again: \"Cast her out; she and her sons are\nslaves. They have no place amongst the sons of God.\" Ishmael was in\nthe way of Isaac's safety and prosperity. And the Judaic ascendency\nwas no less a danger to the Church. The blow which shattered\nJudaism, at once cleared the ground for the outward progress of\nthe gospel and arrested the legalistic reaction which hindered its\ninternal development. The two systems were irreconcilable. It was\nPaul's merit to have first apprehended this contradiction in its\nfull import. The time had come to apply in all its rigour Christ's\nprinciple of combat, \"He that is not with Me, is against Me.\" It is\nthe same rule of exclusion which Paul announces: \"If any man hath\nnot the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His\" (Rom. viii. 9). Out of\nChrist is no salvation. When the day of judgement comes, whether for\nmen or nations, this is the touchstone: Have we, or have we not \"the\nSpirit of God's Son?\" Is our character that of sons of God, or slaves\nof sin? On the latter falls inevitably the sentence of expulsion, \"He\nwill gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them that\ndo iniquity\" (Matt. xiii. 41).\n\nThis passage signalises the definite breach of Christianity with\nJudaism. The elder Apostles lingered in the porch of the Temple;\nthe primitive Church clung to the ancient worship. Paul does not\nblame them for doing so. In their case this was but the survival\nof a past order, in principle acknowledged to be obsolete. But the\nChurch of the future, the spiritual seed of Abraham gathered out\nof all nations, had no part in Legalism. The Apostle bends all his\nefforts to convince his readers of this, to make them sensible of\nthe impassable gulf lying between them and outworn Mosaism. Again he\nrepeats, \"We are not children of a maidservant, but of her that is\nfree\" (ver. 31). The Church of Christ can no more hold fellowship\nwith Judaism than could Isaac with the spiteful, mocking Ishmael.\nPaul leads the Church across the Rubicon. There is no turning back.\n\nVer. 1 of ch. v. is the application of the allegory. It is a\ntriumphant assertion of liberty, a ringing summons to its defence.\nIts separation from ch. iv. is ill-judged, and runs counter to\nthe ancient divisions of the Epistle. \"Christ set us free,\" Paul\ndeclares; \"and it was _for freedom_[129]--not that we might fall\nunder a new servitude. _Stand fast_ therefore; do not let yourselves\nbe made bondmen over again.\" Bondmen the Galatians had been before\n(ch. iv. 8), bowing down to false and vile gods. Bondmen they will\nbe again, if they are beguiled by the Legalists to accept the yoke\nof circumcision, if they take \"the Jerusalem that now is\" for their\nmother. They have tasted the joys of freedom; they know what it is to\nbe sons of God, heirs of His kingdom and partakers of His Spirit; why\ndo they stoop from their high estate? Why should Christ's freemen put\na yoke upon their own neck? Let them only know their happiness and\nsecurity in Christ, and refuse to be cheated out of the substance of\ntheir spiritual blessings by the illusive shadows which the Judaists\noffer them. Freedom once gained is a prize never to be lost. No care,\nno vigilance in its preservation can be too great. Such liberty\ninspires courage and good hope in its defence. \"Stand fast therefore.\nQuit yourselves like men.\"\n\n [129] The reading of this clause is doubtful. The ancient\n witnesses disagree. Dr. Hort suggests that the Revised\n reading--the best attested, but scarcely grammatical--may be\n due to a primitive corruption, \u03a4\u0397 for \u0395\u03a0 (\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u1fb3). This\n emendation gives an excellent and apposite sense: _for (with a\n view to) freedom Christ set us free_. The phrase \u1f10\u03c0' \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u1fb3\n is found in ver. 13, and would gain additional force there, if\n read as a repetition of what is affirmed here. The confusion of\n letters involved is a natural one; and once made at an early time\n in some standard copy, it would account for the extraordinary\n confusion of reading into which the verse has fallen. If\n conjectural emendation may be admitted anywhere in the N. T., it\n is legitimate in this instance.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHow the Galatians responded to the Apostle's challenge, we do not\nknow. But it has found an echo in many a heart since. The Lutheran\nReformation was an answer to it; so was the Scottish Covenant. The\nspirit of Christian liberty is eternal. Jerusalem or Rome may strive\nto imprison it. They might as well seek to bind the winds of heaven.\nIts home is with God. Its seat is the throne of Christ. It lives by\nthe breath of His Spirit. The earthly powers mock at it, and drive it\ninto the wilderness. They do but assure their own ruin. It leaves the\nhouse of the oppressor desolate. Whosoever he be--Judaist or Papist,\npriest, or king, or demagogue--that makes himself lord of God's\nheritage and would despoil His children of the liberties of faith,\nlet him beware lest of him also it be spoken, \"Cast out the bondwoman\nand her son.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XX.\n\n_SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED_\n\n \"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision,\n Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every\n man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do\n the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye who would be\n justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace. For we\n through the Spirit by faith wait for the hope of righteousness.\n For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor\n uncircumcision; but faith working through love.\"--GAL. v. 2-6.\n\n\nShall the Galatians be circumcised, or shall they not? This is the\ndecisive question. The denunciation with which Paul begins his\nletter, the narrative which follows, the profound argumentation, the\ntender entreaty of the last two chapters, all converge toward this\ncrucial point. So far the Galatian Churches had been only dallying\nwith Judaism. They have been tempted to the verge of apostasy; but\nthey are not yet over the edge. Till they consent to be circumcised,\nthey have not finally committed themselves; their freedom is not\nabsolutely lost. The Apostle still hopes, despite his fears, that\nthey will stand fast (ver. 10; ch. iv. 11; iii. 4). The fatal step\nis eagerly pressed on them by the Judaizers (ch. vi. 12, 13), whose\npersuasion the Galatians had so far entertained, that they had begun\nto keep the Hebrew sabbath and feast-days (ch. iv. 10). If they\nyield to this further demand, the battle is lost; and this powerful\nEpistle, with all the Apostle's previous labour spent upon them, has\nbeen in vain. To sever this section from the polemical in order to\nattach it to the practical part of the Epistle, as many commentators\ndo, is to cut the nerve of the Apostle's argument and reduce it to an\nabstract theological discussion.\n\nThis momentous question is brought forward with the greater emphasis\nand effect, because it has hitherto been kept out of sight. The\nallusion to Titus in ch. ii. 1-5 has already indicated the supreme\nimportance of the matter of circumcision. But the Apostle has delayed\ndealing with it formally and directly, until he is able to do so with\nthe weight of the foregoing chapters to support his interdict. He has\nshattered the enemies' position with his artillery of logic, he has\nassailed the hearts of his readers with all the force of his burning\nindignation and subduing pathos. Now he gathers up his strength for\nthe final charge home, which must decide the battle.\n\nI. LO, I PAUL TELL YOU! When he begins thus, we feel that the\ndecisive moment is at hand. Everything depends on the next few words.\nPaul stands like an archer with his bow drawn at full stretch and the\narrow pointed to the mark. \"Let others say what they may; this is\nwhat _I_ tell you. If my word has any weight with you, give heed to\nthis:--IF YOU BE CIRCUMCISED, CHRIST WILL PROFIT YOU NOTHING.\"\n\nNow his bolt is shot; we see what the Apostle has had in his mind all\nthis time. Language cannot be more explicit. Some of his readers will\nhave failed to catch the subtler points of his argument, or the finer\ntones of his voice of entreaty; but every one will understand this.\nThe most \"senseless\" and volatile amongst the Galatians will surely\nbe sobered by the terms of this warning. There is no escaping the\ndilemma. Legalism and Paulinism, the true and the false gospel, stand\nfront to front, reduced to their barest form, and weighed each in the\nbalance of its practical result. _Christ--or Circumcision_: which\nshall it be?\n\nThis declaration is no less authoritative and judicially threatening\nthan the anathema of ch. i. That former denouncement declared\nthe false teachers severed from Christ. Those who yield to their\npersuasion, will be also \"severed from Christ.\" They will fall into\nthe same ditch as their blind leaders. The Judaizers have forfeited\ntheir part in Christ; they are false brethren, tares among the wheat,\ntroublers and hinderers to the Church of God. And Gentile Christians\nwho choose to be led astray by them must take the consequences. If\nthey obey the \"other gospel,\" Christ's gospel is theirs no longer. If\nthey rest their faith on circumcision, they have withdrawn it from\nHis cross. Adopting the Mosaic regimen, they forego the benefits of\nChrist's redemption. \"Christ will profit you nothing.\" The sentence\nis negative, but no less fearful on that account. It is as though\nChrist should say, \"Thou hast no part with Me.\"\n\nCircumcision will cost the Galatian Christians all they possess in\nJesus Christ. But is not this, some one will ask, an over-strained\nassertion? Is it consistent with Paul's professions and his policy\nin other instances? In ver. 6, and again in the last chapter,\nhe declares that \"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision\nnothing\"; and yet here he makes it _everything_! The Apostle's\nposition is this. In itself the rite is valueless. It was the\nsacrament of the Old Covenant, which was brought to an end by the\ndeath of Christ. For the new Church of the Spirit, it is a matter\nof perfect indifference whether a man is circumcised or not. Paul\nhad therefore circumcised Timothy, whose mother was a Jewess (Acts\nxvi. 1-3), though neither he nor his young disciple supposed that\nit was a religious necessity. It was done as a social convenience;\n\"uncircumcision was nothing,\" and could in such a case be surrendered\nwithout prejudice. On the other hand, he refused to submit Titus to\nthe same rite; for he was a pure Greek, and on him it could only have\nbeen imposed on religious grounds and as a passport to salvation.\nFor this, and for no other reason, it was demanded by the Judaistic\nparty. In this instance it was needful to show that \"circumcision\nis nothing.\" The Galatians stood in the same position as Titus.\nCircumcision, if performed on them, must have denoted, not as in\nTimothy's case, the fact of Jewish birth, but _subjection to the\nMosaic law_. Regarded in this light, the question was one of life or\ndeath for the Pauline Churches. To yield to the Judaizers would be\nto surrender the principle of salvation by faith. The attempt of the\nlegalist party was in effect to force Christianity into the grooves\nof Mosaism, to reduce the world-wide Church of the Spirit to a sect\nof moribund Judaism.\n\nWith what views, with what aim were the Galatians entertaining this\nJudaic \"persuasion\"? Was it to make them sons of God and heirs of His\nkingdom? This was the object with which \"God sent forth His Son;\"\nand the Spirit of sonship assured them that it was realised (ch.\niv. 4-7). To adopt the former means to this end was to renounce the\nlatter. In turning their eyes to this new bewitchment, they must be\nconscious that their attention was diverted from the Redeemer's\ncross and their confidence in it weakened (ch. iii. 1). To be\ncircumcised would be to rest their salvation formally and definitely\non works of law, in place of the grace of God. The consequences of\nthis Paul has shown in relating his discussion with Peter, in ch. ii.\n15-21. They would \"make\" themselves \"transgressors;\" they would \"make\nChrist's death of none effect.\" In the soul's salvation Christ will\nbe all, or nothing. If we trust Him, we must trust Him altogether.\nThe Galatians had already admitted a suspicion of the power of His\ngrace, which if cherished and acted on in the way proposed, must\nsever all communion between their souls and Him. Their circumcision\nwould be \"the sacrament of their excision from Christ\" (Huxtable).\n\nThe tense of the verb is _present_. Paul's readers may be in the act\nof making this disastrous compliance. He bids them look for a moment\nat the depth of the gulf on whose brink they stand. \"Stop!\" he cries,\n\"another step in that direction, and you have lost Christ.\"\n\nAnd what will they get in exchange? They will saddle themselves with\nall the obligations of the Mosaic law (ver. 3). This probably was\nmore than they bargained for. They wished to find a _via media_, some\ncompromise between the new faith and the old, which would secure to\nthem the benefits of Christ without His reproach, and the privileges\nof Judaism without its burdens. This at least was the policy of the\nJudaic teachers (ch. vi. 12, 13). But it was a false and untenable\nposition. \"Circumcision verily profiteth, _if thou art a doer of\nthe law_\" (Rom. ii. 25); otherwise it brings only condemnation.\nHe who receives the sacrament of Mosaism, by doing so pledges\nhimself to \"keep and do\" every one of its \"ordinances, statutes,\nand judgements\"--a yoke which, honest Peter said, \"Neither we nor\nour fathers were able to bear\" (Acts xv. 10). Let the Galatians\nread the law, and consider what they are going to undertake. He\nwho goes with the Judaists a mile, will be compelled to go twain.\nThey will not find themselves at liberty to pick and choose amongst\nthe legal requirements. Their legalist teachers will not raise a\nfinger to lighten the yoke (Luke xi. 46), when it is once fastened\non their necks; nor will their own consciences acquit them of its\nresponsibilities. This obligation Paul, himself a master in Jewish\nlaw, solemnly affirms: \"I protest (I declare before God) to every man\nthat is circumcised, that he is a debtor to perform the whole law.\"\n\nNow this is a proved impossibility. Whoever \"sets up the law,\" he\nhad avouched to Cephas, \"makes himself a transgressor\" (ch. ii. 18).\nNay, it was established of set purpose to \"multiply transgressions,\"\nto deepen and sharpen the consciousness of sin (ch. iii. 19; Rom.\niii. 20; iv. 15; v. 20). Jewish believers in Christ, placed under its\npower by their birth, had thankfully found in the faith of Christ\na refuge from its accusations (ch. ii. 16; Rom. vii. 24-viii. 4).\nSurely the Galatians, knowing all this, will not be so foolish as to\nput themselves gratuitously under its power. To do this would be an\ninsult to Christ, and an act of moral suicide. This further warning\nreinforces the first, and is uttered with equal solemnity. \"I tell\nyou, Christ will profit you nothing; and again I testify, the law\nwill lay its full weight upon you.\" They will be left, without the\nhelp of Christ, to bear this tremendous burden.\n\nThis double threatening is blended into one in ver. 4. The pregnant\nforce of Paul's Greek is untranslatable. Literally his words run,\n\"You were nullified from Christ (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b3\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6)--brought\nto nought (being severed) from Him, you that in law are seeking\njustification.\" He puts his assertion in the past (_aorist_)\ntense, stating that which ensues so soon as the principle of legal\njustification is endorsed. From that moment the Galatians cease to be\nChristians. In this sense they \"are abolished,\" just as \"the cross\nis\" virtually \"abolished\" if the Apostle \"preaches circumcision\"\n(ver. 11), and \"death is being abolished\" under the reign of Christ\n(1 Cor. xv. 26). He has said in ver. 2 that Christ will be made of\nnone effect to them; now he adds that they \"are made of none effect\"\nin relation to Christ. Their Christian standing is destroyed. The\njoyous experiences of their conversion, their share in Abraham's\nblessing, their Divine sonship witnessed to by the Holy Spirit--all\nthis is nullified, cancelled at a stroke, if they are circumcised.\nThe detachment of their faith \"from Christ\" is involved in the\nprocess of attaching it to Jewish ordinances, and brings spiritual\ndestruction upon them. The root of the Christian life is faith in\nHim. Let that root be severed, let the branch no longer \"abide in the\nvine\"--it is dead already.[130]\n\n [130] Comp. John xv. 5, 6, where in \u1f10\u03b2\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b8\u03b7, there is a\n like _summary_ aorist.\n\nCut off from Christ, they \"have fallen from grace.\" Paul has already\ntwice identified _Christ_ and _grace_, in ch. i. 6 and ii. 21. The\nDivine mercies centre in Jesus Christ; and he who separates himself\nfrom Him, shuts these out of his soul. The verb here used by the\nApostle (\u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5) is commonly applied (four times _e.g._ in Acts\nxxvii.) to a ship driven out of her course. Some such image seems\nto be in the writer's mind in this passage. These racers made an\nexcellent start, but they have stumbled (ver. 7; ch. iii. 3); the\nvessel set out from harbour in gallant style, but she is drifting\nfast upon the rocks. This sentence \"is the exact opposite of 'stand\nin the grace,' Rom. v. 2\" (Beet).[131]\n\n [131] Comp. 2 Pet. iii. 17; for the figure suggested, Eph. iv.\n 14; 1 Tim. i. 19.\n\nThat he who \"seeks justification in _law_ has fallen from _grace_,\"\nneeds no proof after the powerful demonstration of ch. ii. 14-21.\nThe moralist claims quittance on the ground of his deservings. He\npleads the quality of his \"works,\" his punctual discharge of every\nstipulated duty, from circumcision onwards. \"I fast twice a week,\"\nhe tells his Divine Judge; \"I tithe all my gains. I have kept all\nthe commandments from my youth up.\" What can God expect more than\nthis? But with these performances Grace has nothing to do. The man is\nnot in its order. If he invokes its aid, it is as a make-weight, a\nsupplement to the possible shortcomings in a virtue for the most part\ncompetent for itself. Now the grace of God is not to be set aside\nin this way; it refuses to be treated as a mere _succedaneum_ of\nhuman virtue. Grace, like Christ, insists on being \"all in all.\" \"If\nsalvation is by grace, it is no longer of works;\" and \"if of works,\nit is no more grace\" (Rom. xi. 6). These two methods of justification\nimply different moral tempers, an opposite set and direction of\nthe current of life. This question of circumcision brings the\nGalatians to the parting of the ways. _Grace_ or _Law_--which of\nthe two roads will they follow? Both they cannot. They may become\nJewish proselytes; but they will cease to be Christians. Leaving\nbehind them the light and joy of the heavenly Zion, they will find\nthemselves wandering in the gloomy desolations of Sinai.\n\nII. From this prospect the Apostle bids his readers turn to that\nwhich he himself beholds, and which they erewhile shared with him.\nAgain he seems to say, \"Be ye as I am, brethren\" (ch. iv. 12); not\nin outward condition alone, but still more in inward experience and\naspiration. \"For _we_ by the Spirit, on the ground of faith, are\nawaiting the hope of righteousness\" (ver. 5).\n\nLook on this picture, and on that. Yonder are the Galatians, all in\ntumult about the legalistic proposals, debating which of the Hebrew\nfeasts they shall celebrate and with what rites, absorbed in the\ndetails of Mosaic ceremony, all but persuaded to be circumcised and\nto settle their scruples out of hand by a blind submission to the\nLaw. And here, on the other side, is Paul with the Church of the\nSpirit, walking in the righteousness of faith and the communion of\nthe Holy Spirit, joyfully awaiting the Saviour's final coming and the\nhope that is laid up in heaven. How vexed, how burdened, how narrow\nand puerile is the one condition of life; how large and lofty and\nsecure the other. \"We,\" says the Apostle, \"are looking _forwards_ not\nbackwards, to Christ and not to Moses.\"\n\nEvery word in this sentence is full of meaning. _Faith_ carries\nan emphasis similar to that it has in ch. ii. 16; iii. 22; and in\nRom. iv. 16. Paul supports by contrast what he has just said: \"Your\nshare in the kingdom of grace is lost who seek a legal righteousness\n(ver. 4); it is _by faith_ that we look for our heritage.\" _Hope_ is\nclearly _matter of hope_, the future glory of the redeemed, described\nin Rom. viii. 18-25, Phil. iii. 20, 21, in both of which places\nthere appears the remarkably compounded verb (\u1f00\u03c0-\u03b5\u03ba-\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1) that\nconcludes this verse. It implies an intent expectancy, sure of its\nobject and satisfied with it. The hope is \"righteousness' hope\"--the\nhope of the righteous--for it has in righteousness its warrant. The\nsaying of Psalm xvi., verified in Christ's rising from the dead,\ncontains its principle: \"Thou wilt not leave my soul to death; nor\nsuffer Thine holy one to see the pit.\" This was the secret \"hope of\nIsrael,\"[132] that grew up in the hearts of the men of faith, whose\naccomplishment is the crowning glory of the redemption of Christ. It\nis the goal of faith. Righteousness is the path that leads to it. The\nGalatians had been persuaded of this hope and embraced it; if they\naccept the \"other gospel,\" with its phantom of a legal righteousness,\ntheir hope will perish.\n\n [132] Acts xxiii. 6; xxiv. 15; xxvi. 6-8; comp. John vi. 39, 40,\n 44.\n\nThe Apostle is always true to the order of thought here indicated.\nFaith saves from first to last. The present righteousness and future\nglory of the sons of God alike have their source in faith. The act\nof reliance by which the initial justification of the sinner was\nattained, now becomes the habit of the soul, the channel by which\nits life is fed, rooting itself ever more deeply into Christ and\nabsorbing more completely the virtue of His death and heavenly life.\nFaith has its great ventures; it has also its seasons of endurance,\nits moods of quiet expectancy, its unweariable patience. It can wait\nas well as work. It rests upon the past, seeing in Christ crucified\nits \"author;\" then it looks on to the future, and claims Christ\nglorified for its \"finisher.\" So faith prompts her sister Hope and\npoints her to \"the glory that shall be revealed.\" If faith fails,\nhope quickly dies. Unbelief is the mother of despair. \"Of faith,\"\nthe Apostle says, \"we look out!\"\n\nA second condition, inseparable from the first, marks the hope proper\nto the Christian righteousness. It is sustained \"by the Spirit.\" The\nconnection of faith and hope respectively with the gift of the Holy\nSpirit is marked very clearly by Paul in Eph. i. 13, 14: \"Having\nbelieved, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit, who is _the earnest\nof our inheritance_.\" The Holy Spirit seals the sons of God--\"sons,\nthen heirs\" (ch. iv. 6, 7; Rom. viii. 15-17). This stamps on\nChristian hope a _spiritual_ character. The conception which we form\nof it, the means by which it is pursued, the temper and attitude in\nwhich it is expected, are determined by the Holy Spirit who inspires\nit. This pure and celestial hope is therefore utterly removed from\nthe selfish ambitions and the sensuous methods that distinguished the\nJudaistic movement (ch. iv. 3, 9; vi. 12-14). \"Men of worldly, low\ndesign\" like Paul's opponents in Galatia, had no right to entertain\n\"the hope of righteousness.\" These matters are spiritually discerned;\nthey are \"the things of the Spirit, the things which God hath\nprepared for them that love Him\" (1 Cor. ii. 9-14).\n\nIf faith and hope are in sight, _love_ cannot be far off. In the\nnext verse it comes to claim its place beside the other two: \"faith\nworking through love.\" And so the blessed trio is complete, _Fides,\namor, spes: summa Christianismi_ (Bengel). Faith waits, but it also\n_works_;[133] and love is its working energy. Love gives faith\nhands and feet; hope lends it wings. Love is the fire at its heart,\nthe life-blood coursing in its veins; hope the light that gleams\nand dances in its eyes. Looking back to the Christ that hath been\nmanifested, faith kindles into a boundless love; looking onward to\nthe Christ that shall be revealed, it rises into an exultant hope.\n\n [133] \"_Working_ through love,\" not _wrought_ (R.V. _margin_).\n The latter rendering of the participle is found in some of\n the Fathers, and is preferred by Romanist interpreters in the\n interest of their doctrine of _fides formata_. Paul's theology\n and his verbal usage alike require the _middle_ sense of this\n verb, adopted by modern commentators with one consent. The middle\n voice implies that through love faith _gets into action_, _is\n operative_, _efficacious_, _shows what it can do_. Comp., for\n Pauline usage, Rom. vii. 5; 2 Cor. i. 6, iv. 12; Eph. iii. 20;\n Col. i. 29; 1 Thess. ii. 13; 2 Thess. ii. 7; and see Moulton's\n Winer's _N. T. Grammar_, p. 318 (note on _dynamic middle_).\n\nThese closing words are of no little theological importance. \"They\nbridge over the gulf which seems to separate the language of Paul and\nJames. Both assert a principle of practical energy, as opposed to a\nbarren, inactive theory\" (Lightfoot). Had the faith of Paul's readers\nbeen more practical, had they been of a diligent, enterprising\nspirit, \"ready for every good word and work,\" they would not have\nfelt, to the same degree, the spell of the Judaistic fascination.\nIdle hands, vain and restless minds, court temptation. A manly,\nenergetic faith will never play at ritualism or turn religion into a\nround of ceremonial, an \u00e6sthetic exhibition. Loving and self-devoting\nfaith in Christ is the one thing Paul covets to see in the Galatians.\nThis is the working power of the gospel, the force that will lift\nand regenerate mankind. In comparison with this, questions of\nChurch-order and forms of worship are \"nothing.\" \"The body is more\nthan the raiment.\" Church organization is a means to a certain end;\nand that end consists in the life of faith and love in Christian\nsouls. Each man is worth to Christ and to His Church just so much as\nhe possesses of this energy of the Spirit, just so much as he has of\nlove to Christ and to men in Him. Other gifts and qualities, offices\nand orders of ministry, are but instruments for love to employ,\nmachinery for love to energize.\n\nThe Apostle wishes it to be understood that he does not condemn\ncircumcision on its own account, as though the opposite condition\nwere in itself superior. If \"circumcision does not avail anything,\n_neither does uncircumcision_.\" The Jew is no better or worse a\nChristian because he is circumcised; the Gentile no worse or better,\nbecause he is not. This difference in no way affects the man's\nspiritual standing or efficiency. Let the Galatians dismiss the whole\nquestion from their minds. \"One thing is needful,\" to be filled with\nthe Spirit of love. \"God's kingdom is not meat and drink;\" it is not\n\"days and seasons and years;\" it is not circumcision, nor rubrics and\nvestments and priestly functions; it is \"righteousness and peace and\njoy in the Holy Spirit.\" These are the true _notes_ of the Church;\n\"by love,\" said Christ, \"all men will know that you are My disciples.\"\n\nIn these two sentences (vv. 5 and 6) the religion of Christ is\nsummed up. Ver. 5 gives us its _statics_; ver. 6 its _dynamics_. It\nis a condition, and an occupation; a grand outlook, and an intent\npursuit; a Divine hope for the future, and a sovereign power for the\npresent, with an infinite spring of energy in the love of Christ.\nThe active and passive elements of the Christian life need to be\njustly balanced. Many of the errors of the Church have arisen from\none-sidedness in this respect. Some do nothing but sit with folded\nhands till the Lord comes; others are too busy to think of His coming\nat all. So waiting degenerates into indolence; and serving into\nfeverish hurry and anxiety, or mechanical routine. Let hope give\ncalmness and dignity, buoyancy and brightness to our work; let work\nmake our hope sober, reasonable, practical.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"These three abide--faith, hope, and love.\" They cannot change while\nGod is God and man is man. Forms of dogma and of worship have changed\nand must change. There is a perpetual \"removing of the things that\nare shaken, as of things that are made;\" but through all revolutions\nthere \"remain the things which are not shaken.\" To these let us\nrally. On these let us build. New questions thrust themselves to the\nfront, touching matters as little essential to the Church's life as\nthat of circumcision in the Apostolic age. The evil is that we make\nso much of them. In the din of controversy we grow bewildered; our\neyes are blinded with its dust; our souls chafed with its fretting.\nWe lose the sense of proportion; we fail to see who are our true\nfriends, and who our foes. We need to return to the simplicity that\nis in Christ. Let us \"consider Him\"--Christ incarnate, dying, risen,\nreigning--till we are changed into the same image, till His life\nhas wrought itself into ours. Then these questions of dispute will\nfall into their proper place. They will resolve themselves; or wait\npatiently for their solution. Loyalty to Jesus Christ is the only\nsolvent of our controversies.\n\nWill the Galatians be true to Christ? Or will they renounce their\nrighteousness in Him for a legal status, morally worthless, and\nwhich will end in taking from them the hope of eternal life? They\nhave nothing to gain, they have everything to lose in submitting to\ncircumcision.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXI.\n\n_THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS._\n\n \"Ye were running well; who did hinder you that ye should not\n obey the truth? This persuasion _came_ not of him that calleth\n you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence\n to you-ward, in the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded:\n but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgement, whosoever\n he be. But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am\n I still persecuted? then hath the stumblingblock of the cross\n been done away. I would that they which unsettle you would even\n mutilate themselves.\"--GAL. v. 7-12.\n\n\nThe Apostle's controversy with the Legalists is all but concluded.\nHe has pronounced on the question of circumcision. He has shown his\nreaders, with an emphasis and clearness that leave nothing more to be\nsaid, how fearful is the cost at which they will accept the \"other\ngospel,\" and how heavy the yoke which it will impose upon them. A few\nfurther observations remain to be made--of regret, of remonstrance,\nblended with expressions of confidence more distinct than any the\nApostle has hitherto employed. Then with a last contemptuous thrust,\na sort of _coup de grace_ for the Circumcisionists, Paul passes to\nthe practical and ethical part of his letter.\n\nThis section is made up of short, disconnected sentences, shot off in\nvarious directions; as though the writer wished to have done with the\nJudaistic debate, and would discharge at a single volley the arrows\nremaining in his quiver. Its prevailing tone is that of conciliation\ntowards the Galatians (comp. Chapter XVIII.), with increasing\nseverity towards the legalist teachers. \"See how bitter he is against\nthe deceivers. For indeed at the beginning he directed his censures\nagainst the deceived, calling them 'senseless' both once and again.\nBut now that he has sufficiently chastened and corrected them, for\nthe rest he turns against their deceivers. And we should observe his\nwisdom in both these things, in that he admonishes the one party and\nbrings them to a better mind, being his own children and capable of\namendment; but the deceivers, who are a foreign element and incurably\ndiseased, he cuts off\" (Chrysostom).\n\nThere lie before us therefore in this paragraph the following\nconsiderations:--_Paul's hope concerning the Galatian Churches, his\nprotest on his own behalf_, and finally, _his judgement respecting\nthe troublers_.\n\nI. The more hopeful strain of the letter at this point appears to\nbe due to the effect of his argument upon the writer's own mind. As\nthe breadth and grandeur of the Christian faith open out before him,\nand he contrasts its spiritual glory with the ignoble aims of the\nCircumcisionists, Paul cannot think that the readers will any longer\ndoubt which is the true gospel. Surely they will be disenchanted. His\nirrefragable reasonings, his pleading entreaties and solemn warnings\nare bound to call forth a response from a people so intelligent and\nso affectionate. \"For my part,\" he says, \"_I am confident in the\nLord that you will be no otherwise minded_ (ver. 10), that you will\nbe faithful to your Divine calling, despite the hindrances thrown\nin your way.\" They will, he is persuaded, come to see the proposals\nof the Judaizers in their proper light. They will think about the\nChristian life--its objects and principles--as he himself does; and\nwill perceive how fatal would be the step they are urged to take.\nThey will be true to themselves and to the Spirit of sonship they\nhave received. They will pursue more earnestly the hope set before\nthem and give themselves with renewed energy to the work of faith and\nlove (vv. 5, 6), and forget as soon as possible this distracting and\nunprofitable controversy.\n\n\"In the Lord\" Paul cherishes this confidence. \"In Christ's grace\"\nthe Galatians were called to enter the kingdom of God (ver. 8; ch.\ni. 6); and He was concerned that the work begun in them should be\ncompleted (Phil. i. 6). It may be the Apostle at this moment was\nconscious of some assurance from his Master that his testimony in\nthis Epistle would not prove in vain. The recent[134] submission\nof the Corinthians would tend to increase Paul's confidence in his\nauthority over the Gentile Churches.\n\n [134] See Chapter I, pp. 15, 16, on the _date_ of the Epistle.\n\nAnother remembrance quickens the feeling of hope with which the\nApostle draws the conflict to a close. He reminds himself of the\ngood confession the Galatians had aforetime witnessed,[135] the zeal\nwith which they pursued the Christian course, until this deplorable\nhindrance arose: \"You were running well--_finely_. You had fixed your\neyes on the heavenly prize. Filled with an ardent faith, you were\nzealously pursuing the great spiritual ends of the Christian life\n(comp. vv. 5, 6). Your progress has been arrested. You have yielded\nto influences which are not of God who called you, and admitted\namongst you a leaven that, if not cast out, will corrupt you utterly\n(vv. 8, 9). But I trust that this result will be averted. You will\nreturn to better thoughts. You will resume the interrupted race, and\nby God's mercy will be enabled to bring it to a glorious issue\" (ver.\n10).\n\n [135] Comp. ch. iii. 4: \"_ye suffered so many things_.\"\n\nThere is kindness and true wisdom in this encouragement. The Apostle\nhas \"told them the truth;\" he has \"reproved with all authority;\" now\nthat this is done, their remains nothing in his heart but good-will\nand good wishes for his Galatian children. If his chiding has wrought\nthe effect it was intended to produce, then these words of softened\nadmonition will be grateful and healing. They have \"stumbled, but not\nthat they might fall.\" The Apostle holds out the hand of restoration;\nhis confidence animates them to hope better things for themselves. He\nturns his anger away from them, and directs it altogether upon their\ninjurers.\n\nII. The Judaizers had troubled the Churches of Galatia; _they had\nalso maligned the Apostle Paul_. From them undoubtedly the imputation\nproceeded which he repudiates so warmly in ver. 11: \"And I, brethren,\nif I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still persecuted?\"\nThis supposition a moment's reflection would suffice to refute. The\ncontradiction was manifest. The persecution which everywhere followed\nthe Apostle marked him out in all men's eyes as the adversary of\nLegalism.\n\nThere were circumstances, however, that lent a certain colour to this\ncalumny. The circumcision of Timothy, for instance, might be thought\nto look in this direction (Acts xvi. 1-3). And Paul valued his Hebrew\nbirth. He loved his Jewish brethren more than his own salvation\n(Rom. ix. 1-5; xi. 1). There was nothing of the revolutionary or the\niconoclast about him. Personally he preferred to conform to the\nancient usages, when doing so did not compromise the honour of Christ\n(Acts xviii. 18; xxi. 17-26). It was false that he \"taught the Jews\nnot to circumcise their children, nor to walk by the customs\" (Acts\nxxi. 20-26). He did teach them that these things were \"of no avail\nin Christ Jesus;\" that they were in no sense necessary to salvation;\nand that it was contrary to the will of Christ to impose them upon\nGentiles. But it was no part of his business to alter the social\ncustoms of his people, or to bid them renounce the glories of their\npast. While he insists that \"there is no difference\" between Jew and\nGentile in their need of the gospel and their rights in it, he still\nclaims for the Jew the first place in the order of its manifestation.\n\nThis was an entirely different thing from \"preaching circumcision\"\nin the legalist sense, from heralding (\u03ba\u03b7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9: ver. 11) and crying\nup the Jewish ordinance, and making it a religious duty. This\ndifference the Circumcisionists affected not to understand. Some\nof Paul's critics will not understand it even now. They argue that\nthe Apostle's hostility to Judaism in this Epistle discredits the\nnarrative of the Acts of the Apostles, inasmuch as the latter relates\nseveral instances of Jewish conformity on his part. What pragmatical\nnarrowness is this! Paul's adversaries said, \"He derides Judaism\namongst you Gentiles, who know nothing of his antecedents, or of his\npractice in other places. But when he pleases, this liberal Paul will\nbe as zealous for circumcision as any of us. Indeed he boasts of his\nskill in 'becoming all things to all men;' he trims his sail to every\nbreeze. In _Galatia_ he is all breadth and tolerance; he talks about\nour 'liberty which we have in Christ Jesus;' he is ready to 'become\nas you are;' no one would imagine he had ever been a Jew. In _Judea_\nhe makes a point of being strictly orthodox, and is indignant if any\none questions his devotion to the Law.\"\n\nPaul's position was a delicate one, and open to misrepresentation.\nMen of party insist on this or that external custom as the badge of\ntheir own side; they have their party-colours and their uniform.\nMen of principle adopt or lay aside such usages with a freedom\nwhich scandalizes the partisan. What right, he says, has any one to\nwear our colours, to pronounce our shibboleth, if he is not one of\nourselves? If the man will not be with us, let him be against us.\nHad Paul renounced his circumcision and declared himself a Gentile\nout and out, the Judaists might have understood him. Had he said,\n_Circumcision is evil_, they could have endured it better; but to\npreach that _Circumcision is nothing_, to reduce this all-important\nrite to insignificance, vexed them beyond measure. It was in their\neyes plain proof of dishonesty. They tell the Galatians that Paul is\nplaying a double part, that his resistance to their circumcision is\ninterested and insincere.\n\nThe charge is identical with that of \"man-pleasing\" which the\nApostle repelled in ch. i. 10 (see Chapter III). The emphatic\n\"still\" of that passage recurs twice in this, bearing the same\nmeaning as it does there. Its force is not _temporal_, as though\nthe Apostle were thinking of a former time when he did \"preach\ncircumcision:\" no such reference appears in the context, and these\nterms are inappropriate to his pre-Christian career. The particle\npoints a _logical_ contrast, as _e.g._ in Rom. iii. 7; ix. 19: \"If I\nstill (notwithstanding my professions as a Gentile apostle) preach\ncircumcision, why am I still (notwithstanding my so preaching)\npersecuted?\" Had Paul been known by the Jews to be in other places\na promoter of circumcision, they would have treated him very\ndifferently. He could not then have been, as the Galatians knew him\neverywhere to be, \"in perils from his fellow-countrymen.\"\n\nThe rancour of the Legalists was sufficient proof of Paul's\nsincerity. They were themselves guilty of the baseness with which\nthey taxed him. It was in order to escape the reproach of the cross\n(ver. 11), to atone for their belief in the Nazarene, that they\npersuaded Gentile Christians to be circumcised (ch. vi. 11, 12).\n_They_ were the man-pleasers. The Judaizers knew perfectly well that\nthe Apostle's observance of Jewish usage was no endorsement of their\nprinciples. The print of the Jewish scourge upon his back attested\nhis loyalty to Gentile Christendom (ch. vi. 17; 2 Cor. xi. 24). A\nfurther consequence would have ensued from the duplicity imputed\nto Paul, which he resents even more warmly: \"Then,\" he says, \"if I\npreach circumcision, the offence of the cross is done away!\" He is\ncharged with treason against the cross of Christ. He has betrayed the\none thing in which he glories (ch. vi. 14), to which the service of\nhis life was consecrated! For the doctrine of the cross was at an end\nif the legal ritual were re-established and men were taught to trust\nin the saving efficacy of circumcision--above all, if the Apostle of\nthe Gentiles had preached this doctrine! The Legalists imputed to\nhim the very last thing of which he was capable. This was in fact\nthe error into which Peter had weakly fallen at Antioch. The Jewish\nApostle had then acted as though \"Christ died in vain\" (ch. ii. 21).\nFor himself Paul indignantly denies that his conduct bore any such\nconstruction.\n\nBut he says, \"_the scandal_ of the cross\"--that scandalous,\noffensive cross, the stumbling-block of Jewish pride (1 Cor. i.\n23). The death of Christ was not only revolting in its form to\nJewish sentiment;[136] it was a fatal event for Judaism itself. It\nimported the end of the Mosaic economy. The Church at Jerusalem had\nnot yet fully grasped this fact; they sought, as far as possible,\nto live on good terms with their non-Christian Jewish brethren, and\nadmitted perhaps too easily into their fellowship men who cared\nmore for Judaism than for Christ and His cross. For them also the\nfinal rupture was approaching, when they had to \"go forth unto Jesus\nwithout the camp.\" Paul had seen from the first that the breach\nwas irreparable. He determined to keep his Gentile Churches free\nfrom Judaic entanglements. In his view, Calvary was the terminus of\nMosaism.\n\n [136] Comp. Chapter XII, pp. 193-4.\n\nThis was true _historically_. The crime of national Judaism in\nslaying its Messiah was capital. Its spiritual blindness and its\nmoral failure had received the most signal proof. The congregation of\nIsrael had become a synagogue of Satan. And these were \"the chosen\npeople,\" the world's _\u00e9lite_, who \"crucified the Lord of glory!\"\n_Mankind_ had done this thing. The world has \"both seen and hated\nboth Him and the Father.\" Now to set up circumcision again, or any\nkind of human effort or performance, as a ground of justification\nbefore God, is to ignore this judgement; it is to make void the\nsentence which the cross of Christ has passed upon all \"works of\nrighteousness which we have done.\" This teaching sorely offends\nmoralists and ceremonialists, of whatever age or school; it is \"the\noffence of the cross.\"\n\nAnd further, as matter of _Divine appointment_ the sacrifice of\nCalvary put an end to Jewish ordinances. Their significance was gone.\nThe Epistle to the Hebrews developes this consequence at length in\nother directions. For himself the Apostle views it from a single\nand very definite standpoint. The Law, he says, had brought on men\na curse; it stimulated sin to its worst developments (ch. iii. 10,\n19). Christ's death under this curse has expiated and removed it for\nus (ch. iii. 13). His atonement met man's guilt in its culmination.\nThe Law had not prevented--nay, it gave occasion to the crime; it\nnecessitated, but could not provide expiation, which was supplied\n\"outside the law\" (Rom. iii. 21: \u1f65\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5). The \"offence\" of the\ndoctrine of the cross lay just here. It reconciled man with God on an\nextra-legal footing. It provided a new ground of justification and\npronounced the old worthless. It fixed the mark of moral impotence\nand rejection upon the system to which the Jewish nature clung\nwith passionate pride. To preach the cross was to declare legalism\nabolished: to preach circumcision was to declare the cross and its\noffence abolished.\n\nThis dilemma the Circumcisionists would fain escape. They fought\nshy of Calvary. Like some later moralists, they did not see why the\ncross should be always pushed to the front, and its offence forced\nupon the world. Surely there was in the wide range of Christian\ntruth abundance of other profitable topics to discuss, without\nwounding Jewish susceptibilities in this way. But this endeavour of\ntheirs is just what Paul is determined to frustrate. He confronts\nJudaism at every turn with that dreadful cross. He insists that\nit shall be realised in its horror and its shame, that men shall\nfeel the tremendous shock which it gives to the moral conceit, the\nself-justifying spirit of human nature, which in the Jew of this\nperiod had reached its extreme point. \"If law could save, if the\nworld were not guilty before God,\" he reiterates, \"why that death\nof the cross? God hath set Him forth _a propitiation_.\" And whoso\naccepts Jesus Christ must accept Him _crucified_, with all the\noffence and humiliation that the fact involves.\n\nIn later days the death of Christ has been made void in other ways.\nIt is veiled in the steam of our incense. It is invested with the\nhalo of a sensuous glorification. The cross has been for many turned\ninto an artistic symbol, a beautiful idol, festooned with garlands,\ndraped in poetry, but robbed of its spiritual meaning, its power to\nhumble and to save. Let men see it \"openly set forth,\" in its naked\nterror and majesty, that they may know what they are and what their\nsins have done.\n\nWe rely on birth and good breeding, on art and education as\ninstruments of moral progress. Improved social arrangements, a higher\nenvironment, these, we think, will elevate the race. Within their\nlimits these forces are invaluable; they are ordained of God. But\nthey are only _law_ at the best. When they have done their utmost,\nthey leave man still unsaved--proud, selfish, unclean, miserable.\nTo rest human salvation on self-improvement and social reform, is\nlegalism over again. To civilise is not to regenerate. These methods\nwere tried in Mosaism, under circumstances in many respects highly\nfavourable. \"The scandal of the cross\" was the result. Education\nand social discipline may produce a Pharisee, nothing higher.\nLegislation and environment work from the outside. They cannot touch\nthe essential human heart. Nothing has ever done this like the cross\nof Jesus Christ. He who \"makes it of none effect,\" whether in the\nname of Jewish tradition or of modern progress, takes away the one\npracticable hope of the moral regeneration of mankind.\n\nIII. We are now in a position to estimate more precisely the\ncharacter and motives of the Judaistic party, _the hinderers and\ntroublers_ of this Epistle.\n\nIn the first place, it appears that they had entered the Galatian\ncommunities from without. The fact that they are called _troublers_\n(_disturbers_) of itself suggests this (ver. 10; ch. i. 7). They\ncame with a professed \"gospel,\" as messengers bringing new tidings;\nthe Apostle compares them to himself, the first Galatian evangelist,\n\"or an angel from heaven\" (ch. i. 8, 9). He glances at them in his\nreference to \"false brethren\" at an earlier time \"brought into (the\nGentile Church) unawares\" (ch. ii. 4). These men are \"courting\" the\nfavour of Paul's Galatian disciples, endeavouring to gain them over\nin his absence (ch. iv. 17, 18). They have made misleading statements\nrespecting his early career and relations to the Church, which he is\nat pains to correct. They professed to represent the views of the\nPillars at Jerusalem, and quoted their authority against the Apostle\nPaul.\n\nFrom these considerations we infer that \"the troublers\" were\n_Judaistic emissaries from Palestine_. The second Epistle to Corinth,\ncontemporaneous with this letter, reveals the existence of a similar\npropaganda in the Greek capital at the same period. Paul had given\nthe Galatians warning on the subject at his last visit (ch. i. 9).\nThere were already, we should suppose, in the Galatian societies,\nbefore the arrival of the Judaizers, Jewish believers in Christ\nof legalistic tendencies, prepared to welcome and support the new\nteachers. But it was the coming of these agitators from without that\nthrew the Churches of Galatia into such a ferment, and brought about\nthe situation disclosed in this Epistle.\n\nThe allusion made in chap. ii. 12 to \"certain from James,\"[137]\ntaken in connection with other circumstances, points, as we think,\nto the outbreak of a systematic agitation against the Apostle Paul,\nwhich was carried on during his third missionary tour, and drew from\nhim the great evangelical Epistles of this epoch. This anti-Pauline\nmovement emanated from Jerusalem and pretended to official sanction.\nSet on foot at the time of the collision with Peter at Antioch, the\nconflict is now in full progress. The Apostle's denunciation of his\nopponents is unsparing. They \"hinder\" the Galatians \"from obeying\ntruth\" (ver. 7); they entice them from the path in which they had\nbravely set out, and are robbing them of their heritage in Christ.\nIt was a false, a perverted gospel that they taught (ch. i. 7). They\ncast on their hearers an envious spell which drew them away from\nthe cross and its salvation (ch. ii. 21; iii. 1). Not truth, but\nself-interest and party-ends were the objects they pursued (ch. iv.\n17; vi. 12, 13). Their \"persuasion\" was assuredly not of God, \"who\nhad called\" the Galatians through the Apostle's voice. If God had\nsent Paul amongst them, as the Galatians had good reason to know,\nclearly He had not sent these men, with their \"other gospel.\"\n\n [137] Compare Chapter IX, pp. 131-4. We refer this occurrence to\n the interval between the second and third of Paul's missionary\n journeys (Acts xviii. 22), A.D. 54.\n\nThe vitiating \"leaven\" at work in the spiritual life of the\nGalatians, if not arrested, would soon \"leaven the whole lump.\" The\nApostle applies to the Judaistic doctrine the same figure under which\nhe described the taint of immorality found in the Church of Corinth\n(1 Cor. v. 6-8). So zealous and unscrupulous, so deadly in its effect\non evangelical faith and life was the spirit of Jewish legalism. The\nApostle trusts that his Galatians will after all escape from this\nfatal infection, that they will leave \"the troublers\" alone to \"bear\nthe judgement\" which must fall upon them (ver. 10). The Lord is the\nKeeper, and the Avenger of His Church. No one, \"whosoever he be,\"\nwill injure it with impunity. Let the man that makes mischief in the\nChurch of Jesus Christ take care what he is about. The tempted may\nescape; sins of ignorance and weakness can be forgiven. But woe unto\nthe tempter!\n\nAgainst the wilful perverters of the gospel the Apostle at the outset\ndelivered his anathema. For these Circumcisionists in particular he\nhas one further wish to express. It is a grim sort of suggestion,\nto be read rather by way of sarcasm than in the strict letter of\nfulfilment. The devotees of circumcision, he means to say, might\nas well go a step farther. If the physical mark of Judaism, the\nmere surgical act, is so salutary, why not \"cut off\" the member\naltogether, like the emasculated priests of Cybel\u00e9? (ver. 12).[138]\nThis mutilation belonged to the worship of the great heathen goddess\nof Asia Minor, and was associated with her debasing cultus. Moreover\nit excluded its victim from a place in the congregation of Israel\n(Deut. xxiii. 1).\n\n [138] The rendering of the R.V. _margin_ is that of all the\n Greek interpreters, and of Meyer, Lightfoot, Beet, and the\n strict grammatical commentators amongst the moderns. The form\n and usage of the verb do not allow of any other. Apart from its\n unseemliness, the expression is powerfully appropriate. This\n condemnation of the Old-Testament sacrament is not more severe\n than the language of Isa. lxvi. 3: \"He that slaughtereth an ox is\n a man-slayer, he that bringeth a meal-offering--it is _swine's\n blood_.\"\n\nThis mockery, though not to be judged by modern sentiment, in any\ncase went to the verge of what charity and decency permit. It\nbreathes a burning contempt for the Judaizing policy. It shows how\nutterly circumcision had lost its sacredness for the Apostle. Its\nspiritual import being gone, it was now a mere \"concision\" (Phil.\niii. 2), a cutting of the body--nothing more.\n\nSuch language was well calculated to disgust Gentile Christians with\nthe rite of circumcision. It helps to account for the implacable\nhatred with which Paul was regarded by orthodox Jews. It accords with\nwhat he intimated in ch. iv. 9, to the effect that Jewish conformity\nwas for the Gentiles in effect _heathenish_. Apart from its relation\nto the obsolete Mosaic covenant, circumcision was in itself no holier\nthan the deformities inflicted by Paganism on its votaries.\n\nThe Judaizers are finally described, not merely as \"troublers\" and\n\"hinderers,\" but as \"those that _unsettle_ you\"--or more strongly\nstill, \"_overthrow_ you.\" The Greek word (\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9) occurs in Acts\nxvii. 6, xxi. 38, where it is rendered, _turn upside down, stir to\nsedition_. These men were carrying on a treasonable agitation. False\nthemselves to the gospel of Christ, they incited the Galatians to\nbelie their Christian professions, to betray the cause of Gentile\nliberty, and to desert their own Apostle. They deserved to suffer\nsome degrading punishment. \"Full\" as they were \"of subtlety and\nmischief, perverting the right ways of the Lord,\" Paul did well to\ndenounce them and to turn their zeal for circumcision to derisive\nscorn.\n\n\n\n\n _THE ETHICAL APPLICATION._\n\n CHAPTER v. 13-vi. 10.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXII.\n\n_THE PERILS OF LIBERTY._\n\n \"For ye, brethren, were called for freedom; only _use_ not\n your freedom for an occasion to the flesh, but through love be\n servants one to another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one\n word, _even_ in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.\n But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not\n consumed one of another.\"--GAL. v. 13-15.\n\n\nOur analysis has drawn a strong line across the middle of this\nchapter. At ver. 13 the Apostle turns his mind in the ethical\ndirection. He has dismissed \"the troublers\" with contempt in ver. 12;\nand until the close of the Epistle does not mention them again; he\naddresses his readers on topics in which they are left out of view.\nBut this third, ethical section of the letter is still continuous\nwith its polemical and doctrinal argument.\n\nIt applies the maxim of ver. 6, \"Faith works through love\"; it\nreminds the Galatians how they had \"received the Spirit of God\" (ch.\niii. 2, 3; iv. 6). The rancours and jealousies opposed to love,\nthe carnal mind that resists the Spirit--these are the objects\nof Paul's dehortations. The moral disorders which the Apostle\nseeks to correct arose largely out of the mischief caused by the\nJudaizers. And his exhortations to love and good works are themselves\nindirectly polemical. They vindicate Paul's gospel from the charge\nof antinomianism, while they guard Christians from giving occasion\nto the charge. They protect from exaggeration and abuse the liberty\nalready defended from legalistic encroachments. The more precious\nand sacred is the freedom of Gentile believers, the more on the one\nhand do those deserve punishment who would defraud them of it; and\nthe more earnestly must they on their part guard this treasure from\nmisuse and dishonour. In this sense ver. 13_a_ stands between the\nsentence against the Circumcisionists in ver. 12 and the appeal to\nthe Galatians that follows. It repeats the proclamation of freedom\nmade in ver. 1, making it the ground at once of the judgement\npronounced against the foes of freedom and the admonition addressed\nto its possessors. \"_For you were called_ (summoned by God to enter\nthe kingdom of His Son) _with a view to liberty_--not to legal\nbondage; nor, on the other hand, that you might run into licence\nand give the reins to self-will and appetite--not _liberty for an\noccasion to the flesh_.\"\n\nI. Here lies _the danger of liberty_, especially when conferred on a\nyoung, untrained nature, and in a newly emancipated community.\n\nFreedom is a priceless boon; but it is a grave responsibility. It\nhas its temptations, as well as its joys and dignities. The Apostle\nhas spoken at length of the latter: it is the former that he has\nnow to urge. Keep your liberties, he seems to say; for Christ's\nsake and for truth's sake hold them fast, guard them well. You are\nGod's regenerated sons. Never forego your high calling. God is on\nyour side; and those who assail you shall feel the weight of His\ndispleasure. Yes, \"stand fast\" in the liberty wherewith \"Christ made\nyou free.\" But take care how you employ your freedom; \"only use not\nliberty for an occasion to the flesh.\" This significant _only_ turns\nthe other side of the medal, and bids us read the legend on its\nreverse front. On the obverse we have found it written, \"The Lord\nknoweth them that are His\" (2 Tim. ii. 19; comp. Gal. iv. 6, 9). This\nis the side of _privilege_ and of grace, the spiritual side of the\nChristian life. On the reverse it bears the motto, \"Let every one\nthat nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.\" This is the\nsecond, the ethical side of our calling, the side of _duty_, to which\nwe have now to turn.\n\nThe man, or the nation that has won its freedom, has won but half the\nbattle. It has conquered external foes; it has still to prevail over\nitself. And this is the harder task. Men clamour for liberty, when\nthey mean licence; what they seek is the liberty of the flesh, not\nof the Spirit, freedom to indulge their lusts and to trample on the\nrights of others, the freedom of outlaws and brigands. The natural\nman defines freedom as the power to do as he likes; not the right of\nself-regulation, but the absence of regulation is what he desires.\nAnd this is just what the Spirit of God will never allow (ver. 17).\nWhen such a man has thrown off outward constraint and the dread of\npunishment, there is no inward law to take its place. It is his\ngreed, his passion, his pride and ambition that call for freedom; not\nhis conscience. And to all such libertarians our Saviour says, \"He\nthat committeth sin is _the slave of sin_.\" No tyrant is so vile, so\ninsatiable as our own self-indulged sin. A pitiable triumph, for a\nman to have secured his religious liberty only to become the thrall\nof his vices!\n\nIt is possible that some men accepted the gospel under the delusion\nthat it afforded a shelter for sin. The sensualist, deterred from his\nindulgences by fear of the Law, joined in Paul's campaign against\nit, imagining that Grace would give him larger freedom. If \"where\nsin abounded grace did superabound,\" he would say in his heart, Why\nnot sin the more, so that grace might have a greater victory? This\nis no fanciful inference. Hypocrisy has learned to wear the garb\nof evangelical zeal; and teachers of the gospel have not always\nguarded sufficiently against this shocking perversion. Even the man\nwhose heart has been truly touched and changed by Divine grace,\nwhen the freshness of his first love to Christ has passed away and\ntemptation renews its assaults, is liable to this deception. He may\nbegin to think that sin is less perilous, since forgiveness was so\neasily obtained. He may presume that as a son of God, sealed by the\nSpirit of adoption, he will not be allowed to fall, even though he\nstumble. He is one of \"God's elect\"; what \"shall separate him\" from\nthe Divine love in Christ? In this assurance he holds a talisman that\nsecures his safety. What need to \"watch and pray lest he enter into\ntemptation,\" when the Lord is his keeper? He is God's enfranchised\nson; \"all things are lawful\" to him; \"things present\" as well as\n\"things to come\" are his in Christ. By such reasonings his liberty\nis turned into an _occasion to the flesh_. And men who before they\nboasted themselves sons of God were restrained by the spirit of\nbondage and fear, have found in this assurance the occasion, the\n\"starting-point\" (\u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae) for a more shameless course of evil.\n\nIn the view of Legalism, this is the natural outcome of Pauline\nteaching. From the first it has been charged with fostering\nlawlessness. In the Lutheran Reformation Rome pointed to the\nAntinomians, and moralists of our own day speak of \"canting\nEvangelicals,\" just as the Judaists alleged the existence of immoral\nPaulinists, whose conduct, they declared, was the proper fruit of the\npreaching of emancipation from the Law. These, they would say to the\nApostle, are your spiritual children; they do but carry your doctrine\nto its legitimate issue. This reproach the gospel has always had\nto bear; there have been those, alas, amongst its professors whose\nbehaviour has given it plausibility. Sensualists will \"turn the grace\nof our God into lasciviousness;\" swine will trample under their feet\nthe pure pearls of the gospel. But they are pure and precious none\nthe less.\n\nThis possibility is, however, a reason for the utmost watchfulness\nin those who are stewards in the administration of the gospel. They\nmust be careful, like Paul, to make it abundantly clear that they\n\"establish\" and do not \"make void law through faith\" (Rom. iii. 31).\nThere is an evangelical Ethics, as well as an evangelical Dogmatics.\nThe ethics of the Gospel have been too little studied and applied.\nHence much of the confessed failure of evangelical Churches in\npreserving and building up the converts that they win.\n\nII. Faith in Christ gives in truth a new efficacy to the moral law.\nFor it works through love; and love fulfils all laws in one (vv.\n13_b_, 14). Where faith has this operation, liberty is safe; not\notherwise. _Love's slaves are the true freemen._\n\nThe legalist practically takes the same view of human nature as the\nsensualist. He knows nothing of \"the desire of the Spirit\" arrayed\nagainst that of the flesh (ver. 17), nothing of the mastery over\nthe heart that belongs to the love of Christ. In his analysis the\nsoul consists of so many desires, each blindly seeking its own\ngratification, which must be drilled into order under external\npressure, by an intelligent application of law. Modern Utilitarians\nagree with the ancient Judaists in their ethical philosophy.\nFear of punishment, hope of reward, the influence of the social\nenvironment--these are, as they hold, the factors which create\ncharacter and shape our moral being. \"Pain and pleasure,\" they tell\nus, \"are the masters of human life.\" Without the faith that man is\nthe child of God, formed in His image, we are practically shut up to\nthis suicidal theory of morals. _Suicidal_ we say, for it robs our\nspiritual being of everything distinctive in it, of all that raises\nthe moral above the natural; it makes duty and personality illusions.\n\nJudaism is a proof that this scheme of life is impracticable. For the\nPharisaic system which produced such deplorable moral results, was\nan experiment in external ethics. It was in fact the application of\na highly developed and elaborate traditional code of law, enforced\nby the strongest outward sanctions, _without personal loyalty to\nthe Divine Lawgiver_. In the national conscience of the Jews this\nwas wanting. Their faith in God, as the Epistle of James declares,\nwas a \"dead\" faith, a bundle of abstract notions. Loyalty is true\nlaw-keeping. And loyalty springs from the personal relationship of\nthe subject and the law-making power. This nexus Christian sonship\nsupplies, in its purest and most exalted form. When I see in the\nLawgiver my Almighty Father, when the law has become incarnate in the\nperson of my Saviour, my heart's King and Lord, it wears a changed\naspect. \"_His commandments_ are not grievous.\" Duty, required by Him,\nis honour and delight. No abstract law, no \"stream of tendency\" can\ncommand the homage or awaken the moral energy that is inspired by\n\"the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.\"\n\nHere the Apostle traverses antinomian deductions from his doctrine of\nliberty. In the Epistle to the Romans (ch. vi.) he deals at length\nwith the theoretical objection to his teaching on this subject.\nHe shows there that salvation by faith, rightly understood and\nexperienced, renders continuance in sin impossible. For faith in\nChrist is in effect the union of the soul with Christ, first in His\ndeath, and then consequently in His risen life, wherein He lives only\n\"to God.\" Nay, Christ Himself lives in the believing man (Gal. ii.\n20). Instead of our sinning \"because we are not under the law, but\nunder grace,\" this is precisely the reason why we need not and must\nnot sin. Faith joins us to the risen Christ, whose life we share--so\nPaul argues--and we should not sin any more than He. Here, from the\npractical standpoint, he lays it down that _faith works by love; and\nlove casts out sin, for it unites all laws in itself_. Faith links us\nto Christ in heaven (Romans); faith fills us with His love on earth\n(Galatians). So love, marked out in ver. 6 as the energy of faith,\nnow serves as the guard of liberty. Neither legalist nor law-breaker\nunderstands the meaning of faith in Christ.\n\nAt this point Paul throws in one of his bold paradoxes. He has been\ncontending all through the Epistle for freedom, bidding his readers\nscorn the legal yoke, breathing into them his own contempt for the\npettiness of Judaistic ceremonial. But now he turns round suddenly\nand bids them _be slaves_: \"but let love,\" he says, \"make you bondmen\nto each other\" (ver. 13). Instead of breaking bonds, he seeks to\ncreate stronger bonds, stronger because dearer. Paul preaches\nno gospel of individualism, of egotistic salvation-seeking. The\nself-sacrifice of Christ becomes in turn a principle of sacrifice in\nthose who receive it. Paul's own ideal is, to be \"conformed to His\ndeath\" (Phil. iii. 10). There is nothing anarchic or self-asserting\nin his plea for freedom. He opposes the law of Pharisaic externalism\nin the interests of the law of Christian love. The yoke of Judaism\nmust be broken, its bonds cast aside, in order to give free play to\n\"the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.\" Faith transfers\nauthority from flesh to spirit, giving it a surer seat, a more\neffective, and in reality more lawful command over man's nature. It\nrestores the normal equipoise of the soul. Now the Divine law is\nwritten on \"the tablets of the heart\"; and this makes it far more\nsovereign than when engraved on the stone slabs of Sinai. Love and\nlaw for the believer in Christ are fused into one. In this union\nlaw loses nothing of its holy severity; and love nothing of its\ntenderness. United they constitute the Christian sense of _duty_,\nwhose sternest exactions are enforced by gratitude and devotion.\n\nAnd love is ever conqueror. To it toil and endurance that mock the\nachievement of other powers, are a light thing. Needing neither bribe\nnor threat, love labours, waits, braves a thousand dangers, keeps the\nhands busy, the eye keen and watchful, the feet running to and fro\nuntired through the longest day. There is no industry, no ingenuity\nlike that of love. Love makes the mother the slave of the babe at\nher breast, and wins from the friend for his friend service that no\ncompulsion could exact, rendered in pure gladness and free-will. Its\npower alone calls forth what is best and strongest in us all. Love is\nmightier than death. In Jesus Christ, love has \"laid down life for\nits friends\"; the fulness of life has encountered and overcome the\nuttermost of death. Love esteems it bondage to be prevented, liberty\nonly to be allowed to serve.\n\nWithout love, freedom is an empty boon. It brings no ease, no joy\nof heart. It is objectless and listless. Bereft of faith and love,\nthough possessing the most perfect independence, the soul drifts\nalong like a ship rudderless and masterless, with neither haven nor\nhorizon. Wordsworth, in his Ode to Duty, has finely expressed the\nweariness that comes of such liberty, unguided by an inward law and a\nDivine ideal:\n\n \"Me this unchartered freedom tires;\n I feel the weight of chance desires:\n My hopes no more must change their name;\n I long for a repose that ever is the same.\"\n\nBut on the other hand,\n\n \"Serene will be our days and bright,\n And happy will our nature be,\n When love is an unerring light,\n And joy its own security.\"\n\nThis \"royal law\" (Jam. ii. 8) blends with its sovereignty of power\nthe charm of simplicity. \"The whole law,\" says the Apostle, \"hath\nbeen fulfilled in one word--LOVE\" (ver. 14). The Master said, \"I came\nnot to destroy the law, but to fulfil.\" The key to His fulfilment was\ngiven in the declaration of the twofold command of love to God and\nto our neighbour. \"On these two hang all the law and the prophets.\"\nHence the Apostle's phrase, _hath been fulfilled_. This unification\nof the moral code is accomplished. Christ's life and death have\ngiven to this truth full expression and universal currency. Love's\nfulfilment of law stands before us a positive attainment, an\nincontestable fact. Paul does not speak here, as in Rom. xiii. 9, of\nthe comprehending, the \"summing up\" of all laws in one; but of the\nbringing of law to its completion, its realisation and consummation\nin the love of Christ. \"O how I love Thy law,\" said the purer spirit\nof the Old Testament. \"Thy love is my law,\" says the true spirit of\nthe New.\n\nIt is remarkable that this supreme principle of Christian ethics\nis first enunciated in the most legal part of the Old Testament.\nLeviticus is the Book of the Priestly Legislation. It is chiefly\noccupied with ceremonial and civil regulations. Yet in the midst\nof the legal minuti\u00e6 is set this sublime and simple rule, than\nwhich Jesus Christ could prescribe nothing more Divine: _Thou shalt\nlove thy neighbour as thyself_ (Levit. xix. 18). This sentence is\nthe conclusion of a series of directions (vv. 9-18) forbidding\nunneighbourly conduct, each of them sealed with the declaration,\n\"I am Jehovah.\" This brief code of brotherly love breathes a truly\nChristian spirit; it is a beautiful expression of \"the law of\nkindness\" that is on the lips and in the heart of the child of God.\nWe find in the law-book of Mosaism, side by side with elaborate rules\nof sacrificial ritual and the homeliest details touching the life\nof a rude agricultural people, conceptions of God and of duty of\nsurpassing loftiness and purity, such as meet us in the religion of\nno other ancient nation.\n\nThe law, therefore, opposed and cast out in the name of faith, is\nbrought in again under the shield of love. \"If ye love Me,\" said\nJesus, \"_keep my commandments_.\" Love reconciles law and faith. Law\nby itself can but prohibit this and that injury to one's neighbour,\nwhen they are likely to arise. Love excludes the doing of any injury;\nit \"worketh no ill to its neighbour, therefore love is the fulfilling\nof the law\" (Rom. xiii. 10). That which law restrains or condemns\nafter the fact, love renders impossible beforehand. It is not content\nwith the negative prevention of wrong; it \"overcomes\" and displaces\n\"evil with good.\"\n\n\"What law could not do,\" with all its multiplied enactments and\nredoubled threats, faith \"working by love\" has accomplished at a\nstroke. \"The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in those who\nwalk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit\" (Rom. viii. 3, 4).\nGentile Christians have been raised to the level of a righteousness\n\"exceeding that of scribes and pharisees\" (Matt. v. 20). The flesh\nwhich defied law's terrors and evaded its control, is subdued by the\nlove of Christ. Law created the need of salvation; it defined its\nconditions and the direction which it must take. But there its power\nceased. It could not change the sinful heart. It supplied no motive\nadequate to secure obedience. The moralist errs in substituting duty\nfor love, works for faith. He would make the rule furnish the motive,\nthe path supply strength to walk in it. The distinction of the gospel\nis that it is \"_the power_ of God unto salvation,\" while the law is\n\"_weak_ through the flesh.\"\n\nPaul does not therefore override the law in the interest of faith.\nQuite the contrary, he establishes, he magnifies it. His theology\nrests on the idea of Righteousness, which is strictly a legal\nconception. But he puts the law in its proper place. He secures\nfor it the alliance of love. The legalist, desiring to exalt law,\nin reality stultifies it. Striving to make it omnipotent, he makes\nit impotent. In the Apostle's teaching, law is the rule, faith the\nspring of action. Law marks the path, love gives the will and power\nto follow it. Who then are the truest friends of law--Legalists or\nPaulinists, moralists or evangelicals?\n\nIII. Alas, the Galatians at the present moment afford a spectacle\nfar different from the ideal which Paul has drawn. Instead of\n\"serving each other in love,\" they are \"biting and devouring one\nanother.\" The Church is in danger of being \"consumed\" by their\njealousies and quarrels (ver. 15).\n\nThese Asiatic Gauls were men of a warm temperament, quick to resent\nwrong and prone to imagine it. The dissensions excited by the Judaic\ncontroversy had excited their combative temper to an unusual degree.\n\"Biting\" describes the wounding and exasperating effect of the manner\nin which their contentions were carried on; \"devour\" warns them of\nits destructiveness. Taunts were hurled across the field of debate;\nvituperation supplied the lack of argument. Differences of opinion\nengendered private feuds and rankling injuries. In Corinth the spirit\nof discord had taken a factious form. It arrayed men in conflicting\nparties, with their distinctive watchwords and badges and sectional\nplatforms. In these Churches it bore fruit in personal affronts\nand quarrels, in an angry, vindictive temper, which spread through\nthe Galatian societies and broke out in every possible form of\ncontention (v. 20). If this state of things continued, the Churches\nof Galatia would cease to exist. Their liberty would end in complete\ndisintegration.\n\nLike some other communities, the Galatian Christians were oscillating\nbetween despotism and anarchy; they had not attained the equilibrium\nof a sober, ordered liberty, the freedom of a manly self-control.\nThey had not sufficient respect either for their own or for each\nother's rights. Some men must be bridled or they will \"bite;\" they\nmust wear the yoke or they run wild. They are incapable of being\na law unto themselves. They have not faith enough to make them\nsteadfast, nor love enough to be an inward guide, nor the Spirit of\nGod in measure sufficient to overcome the vanity and self-indulgence\nof the flesh. But the Apostle still hopes to see his Galatian\ndisciples worthy of their calling as sons of God. He points out\nto them the narrow but sure path that leads between the desert of\nlegalism on the one hand, and the gulf of anarchy and licence on the\nother.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe problem of the nature and conditions of Christian liberty\noccupies the Apostle's mind in different ways in all the letters of\nthis period. The young Churches of the Gentiles were in the gravest\nperil. They had come out of Egypt to enter the Promised Land, the\nheritage of the sons of God. The Judaists sought to turn them aside\ninto the Sinaitic wilderness of Mosaism; while their old habits\nand associations powerfully tended to draw them back into heathen\nimmorality. Legalism and licence were the Scylla and Charybdis on\neither hand, between which it needed the most firm and skilful\npilotage to steer the bark of the Church. The helm of the vessel is\nin Paul's hands. And, through the grace of God, he did not fail in\nhis task. It is in _the love of Christ_ that the Apostle found his\nguiding light. \"Love,\" he has written, \"never faileth.\"\n\nLove is the handmaid of faith, and the firstborn fruit of the Spirit\nof Christ (vv. 6, 22). Blending with the law, love refashions it,\nchanging it into its own image. Thus moulded and transfigured, law\nis no longer an exterior yoke, a system of restraint and penalty; it\nbecomes an inner, sweet constraint. Upon the child of God it acts as\nan organic and formative energy, the principle of his regenerated\nbeing, which charges with its renovating influence all the springs of\nlife. Evil is met no longer by a merely outward opposition, but by\na repugnance proceeding from within. \"The Spirit lusteth against the\nflesh\" (v. 17). The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus becomes\nthe law of the man's new nature. God known and loved in Christ is the\ncentral object of his life. Within the Divine kingdom so created,\nthe realm of love and of the Spirit, the soul henceforth dwells; and\nunder that kingdom it places for itself all other souls, loved like\nitself in Christ.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIII.\n\n_CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH._\n\n [_He showeth the battell of the flesh and the Spirit;\n and the fruits of them both._ Heading in Genevan Bible.]\n\n \"But I say, Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust\n of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and\n the Spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary the one\n to the other; that ye may not do the things that ye would. But\n if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law.... And\n they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with the\n passions and the lusts thereof. If we live by the Spirit, by the\n Spirit let us also walk. Let us not be vainglorious, provoking\n one another, envying one another.\"--GAL. v. 16-26.\n\n\nLove is the guard of Christian freedom. The Holy Spirit is its guide.\nThese principles accomplish what the law could never do. It withheld\nliberty, and yet did not give purity. The Spirit of love and of\nsonship bestows both, establishing a happy, ordered freedom, the\nliberty of the sons of God.\n\nFrom the first of these two factors of Christian ethics the Apostle\npasses in ver. 16 to the second. He conducts us from the consequence\nto the cause, from the human aspect of spiritual freedom to the\nDivine. Love, he has said, fulfils all laws in one. It casts out evil\nfrom the heart; it stays the injurious hand and tongue; and makes\nit impossible for liberty to give the rein to any wanton or selfish\nimpulse. But the law of love is no natural, automatic impulse. It is\na Divine inspiration. \"Love is of God.\" It is the characteristic\n\"fruit of the Spirit\" of adoption (ver. 22), implanted and nourished\nfrom above. When I bid you \"by love serve each other,\" the Apostle\nsays, I do not expect you to keep this law of yourselves, by force of\nnative goodness: I know how contrary it is to your Galatic nature;\n\"but I say, walk in the Spirit,\" and this will be an easy yoke;\nto \"fulfil the desire of the flesh\" will then be for you a thing\nimpossible.\n\nThe word _Spirit_ (\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9) is written indefinitely; but the\nGalatians knew well what Spirit the Apostle meant. It is \"the Spirit\"\nof whom he has spoken so often in this letter, the Holy Spirit of\nGod, who had entered their hearts when they first believed in Christ\nand taught them to call God Father. He gave them their freedom: He\nwill teach them how to use it. The absence of the definite article in\n_Pneuma_ does not destroy its personal force, but allows it at the\nsame time a broad, qualitative import, corresponding to that of the\nopposed \"desire of the flesh.\" The walk governed \"by the Spirit\" is\na _spiritual_ walk. As for the interpretation of the _dative_ case\n(rendered variously _by_, or _in_, or even _for the Spirit_), that is\ndetermined by the meaning of the noun itself. \"The Spirit\" is not the\npath \"in\" which one walks; rather He supplies _the motive principle,\nthe directing influence_ of the new life.[139] Ver. 16 is interpreted\nby vv. 18 and 25. To \"walk in the Spirit\" is to be \"led by the\nSpirit\"; it is so to \"live in the Spirit\" that one habitually \"moves\"\n(_marches_: ver. 25) under His direction.\n\n [139] The construction of ch. vi. 16; Rom. iv. 12; Phil. iii. 16,\n is not strictly analogous.\n\nThis conception of the indwelling Spirit of God as the actuating\npower of the Christian's moral life predominates in the rest of this\nchapter. We shall pursue the general line of the Apostle's teaching\non the subject in the present Chapter, leaving for future exposition\nthe detailed enumeration of the \"fruit of the Spirit\" and \"works\nof the flesh\" contained in vv. 19-23. This antithesis of Flesh and\nSpirit presents the following considerations:--(1) _the diametrical\nopposition of the two forces_; (2) _the effect of the predominance of\none or the other_; (3) _the mastery over the flesh which belongs to\nthose who are Christ's_. In a word, Christ's Spirit is the absolute\nantagonist and the sure vanquisher of our sinful human flesh.\n\nI. \"I say, Walk by the Spirit, and you will verily not fulfil\nthe lust of the flesh.\" On what ground does this bold assurance\nrest? Because, the Apostle replies, _the Spirit and the flesh are\nopposites_ (ver. 17). Each is bent on destroying the ascendency of\nthe other. Their cravings and tendencies stand opposed at every\npoint. Where the former rules, the latter must succumb. \"For the\nflesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.\"\n\nThe verb _lust_ in Greek, as in English, bears commonly an evil\nsense; but not necessarily so, nor by derivation. It is a sad proof\nof human corruption that in all languages words denoting strong\ndesire tend to an impure significance. Paul extends to \"the desire\nof the Spirit\" the term which has just been used of \"the lust of\nthe flesh,\" in this way sharpening the antithesis.[140] Words\nappropriated to the vocabulary of the flesh and degraded by its use,\nmay be turned sometimes to good account and employed in the service\nof the Holy Spirit, whose influence redeems our speech and purges\nthe uncleanness of our lips.\n\n [140] Comp. Jas. iv. 5: \"The Spirit which He made to dwell in\n us, yearneth even unto jealous envy\" (_R. V. margin_); also the\n double use of \u03b6\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03c9 in ch. iv. 17, 18 (Chapter XVIII, pp. 279,\n 280.).\n\nThe opposition here affirmed exists on the widest scale. All history\nis a battlefield for the struggle between God's Spirit and man's\nrebellious flesh. In the soul of a half-sanctified Christian, and\nin Churches like those of Corinth and Galatia whose members are\n\"yet carnal and walk as men,\" the conflict is patent. The Spirit of\nChrist has established His rule in the heart; but His supremacy is\nchallenged by the insurrection of the carnal powers. The contest thus\nrevived in the soul of the Christian is internecine; it is that of\nthe kingdoms of light and darkness, of the opposite poles of good\nand evil. It is an incident in the war of human sin against the\nHoly Spirit of God, which extends over all time and all human life.\nEvery lust, every act or thought of evil is directed, knowingly or\nunknowingly, against the authority of the Holy Spirit, against the\npresence and the rights of God immanent in the creature. Nor is there\nany restraint upon evil, any influence counteracting it in man or\nnation or race, which does not proceed from the Spirit of the Lord.\nThe spirit of man has never been without a Divine Paraclete. \"God\nhath not left Himself without witness\" to any; and \"it is the Spirit\nthat beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.\" The Spirit of\ntruth, the Holy Spirit, is the Spirit of all truth and holiness. In\nthe \"truth as it is in Jesus\" He possesses His highest instrument.\nBut from the beginning it was His office to be God's Advocate, to\nuphold law, to convict the conscience, to inspire the hope of mercy,\nto impart moral strength and freedom. We \"believe in the Holy Ghost,\nthe Lord and Giver of life.\"\n\nThis war of Spirit and Flesh is first ostensibly declared in the\nwords of Gen. vi. 3. This passage indicates the moral reaction of\nGod's Spirit against the world's corruption, and the protest which\nin the darkest periods of human depravity He has maintained. God had\nallowed men to do despite to His good Spirit. But it cannot always\nbe so. A time comes when, outraged and defied, He withdraws His\ninfluence from men and from communities; and the Flesh bears them\nalong to swift destruction. So it was in the world before the Flood.\nSo largely amongst later heathen peoples, when God \"suffered all\nnations to walk in their own ways.\" Even the Mosaic law had proved\nrather a substitute than a medium for the free action of the Spirit\nof God on men. \"The law was spiritual,\" but \"weak through the flesh.\"\nIt denounced the guilt which it was powerless to avert.\n\nWith the advent of Christ all this is changed. The Spirit of God is\nnow, for the first time, sent forth in His proper character and His\nfull energy. At last His victory draws near. He comes as the Spirit\nof Christ and the Father, \"_poured out_ upon all flesh.\" \"A new heart\nwill I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you. I will put\nMy Spirit within you\" (Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27): this was the great hope\nof prophecy; and it is realised. The Spirit of God's Son regenerates\nthe human heart, subdues the flesh, and establishes the communion\nof God with men. The reign of the Spirit on earth was the immediate\npurpose of the manifestation of Jesus Christ.\n\nBut what does Paul really mean by \"the flesh?\" It includes everything\nthat is not \"of the Spirit.\" It signifies the entire potency of sin.\nIt is the contra-spiritual, the undivine in man. Its \"works,\" as we\nfind in vv. 20, 21, are not bodily vices only, but include every\nform of moral debasement and aberration. _Flesh_ in the Apostle's\nvocabulary follows the term _spirit_, and deepens and enlarges its\nmeaning precisely as the latter does. Where _spirit_ denotes the\nsupersensible in man, _flesh_ is the sensible, the bodily nature\nas such. When _spirit_ rises into the supernatural and superhuman,\n_flesh_ becomes the natural, the human by consequence. When _spirit_\nreceives its highest signification, denoting the holy Effluence of\nGod, His personal presence in the world, _flesh_ sinks to its lowest\nand represents unrenewed nature, the evil principle oppugnant and\nalien to God. It is identical with _sin_. But in this profound moral\nsignificance the term is more than a figure. Under its use _the body_\nis marked out, not indeed as the cause, but as the instrument, the\nvehicle of sin. Sin has incorporated itself with our organic life,\nand extends its empire over the material world. When the Apostle\nspeaks of \"the body of sin\" and \"of death,\" and bids us \"mortify the\ndeeds of the body\" and \"the members which are upon the earth,\"[141]\nhis expressions are not to be resolved into metaphors.\n\n [141] See Rom. vi. 6, 12; vii. 4, 5, 23, 24; viii. 10-13; Col.\n ii. 11-13; iii. 5.\n\nOn this definition of the terms, it is manifest that the antagonism\nof the Flesh and Spirit is fundamental. They can never come to terms\nwith each other, nor dwell permanently in the same being. Sin must be\nextirpated, or the Holy Spirit will finally depart. The struggle must\ncome to a definitive issue. Human character tends every day to a more\ndeterminate form; and an hour comes in each case when the victory\nof flesh or spirit is irrevocably fixed, when \"the filthy\" will\nhenceforth \"be filthy still,\" and \"the holy, holy still\" (Rev. xxii.\n11).\n\nThe last clause of ver. 17, \"that ye may not do the things that\nye would,\" has been variously interpreted. The rendering of the\nAuthorized Version (\"so that ye _cannot_\") is perilously misleading.\nIs it that the flesh prevents the Galatians doing the good they\nwould? Or is the Spirit to prevent them doing the evil they otherwise\nwould? Or are both these oppositions in existence at once, so that\nthey waver between good and evil, leading a partly spiritual, partly\ncarnal life, consistent neither in right nor wrong? The last is the\nactual state of the case. Paul is perplexed about them (ch. iv.\n20); they are in doubt about themselves. They did not \"walk in the\nSpirit,\" they were not true to their Christian principles; the flesh\nwas too strong for that. Nor would they break away from Christ and\nfollow the bent of their lower nature; the Holy Spirit held them back\nfrom doing this. So they have two wills,--or practically none. This\nstate of things was designed by God,--\"_in order that_ ye may not\ndo the things ye haply would;\" it accords with the methods of His\ngovernment. Irresolution is the necessary effect of the course the\nGalatians had pursued. So far they stopped short of apostasy; and\nthis restraint witnessed to the power of the Holy Spirit still at\nwork in their midst (ch. iii. 5; vi. 1). Let this Divine hand cease\nto check them, and the flesh would carry them, with the full momentum\nof their will, to spiritual ruin. Their condition is just now one\nof suspense. They are poised in a kind of moral equilibrium, which\ncannot continue long, but in which, while it lasts, the action of the\nconflicting forces of Flesh and Spirit is strikingly manifest.\n\nII. These two principles in their development lead to entirely\nopposite results.\n\n(1) _The works of the flesh_--\"manifest\" alas, both then and\nnow--_exclude from the kingdom of God_. \"I tell you beforehand,\" the\nApostle writes, \"as I have already told you: they who practise such\nthings will not inherit God's kingdom\" (v. 21).\n\nThis warning is essential to Paul's gospel (Rom. ii. 16); it is\ngood news for a world where wrong so often and so insultingly\ntriumphs, that there is a judgement to come. Whatever may be our\nown lot in the great award, we rejoice to believe that there will\nbe a righteous settlement of human affairs, complete and final; and\nthat this settlement is in the hands of Jesus Christ. In view of\nHis tribunal the Apostle goes about \"_warning_ and teaching every\nman.\" And this is his constant note, amongst profligate heathen, or\nhypocritical Jews, or backsliding and antinomian Christians,--\"The\nunrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.\" For that kingdom\nis, above all, _righteousness_. Men of fleshly minds, in the nature\nof things, have no place in it. They are blind to its light, dead to\nits influence, at war with its aims and principles. \"If we say that\nwe have fellowship with Him--the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ--and\nwalk in darkness, _we lie_\" (1 John i. 6). \"Those who do such things\"\nforfeit by doing them the character of sons of God. His children\nseek to be \"perfect as their heavenly Father is perfect.\" They are\n\"blameless and harmless, imitators of God, walking in love as Christ\nloved us\" (Phil. ii. 15; Eph. v. 1, 2). The Spirit of God's Son is\na spirit of love and peace, of temperance and gentleness (v. 22).\nIf these fruits are wanting, the Spirit of Christ is not in us and\nwe are none of His. We are without the one thing by which He said\nall men would know His disciples (John xiii. 35). When the Galatians\n\"bite and devour one another,\" they resemble Ishmael the persecutor\n(ch. iv. 29), rather than the gentle Isaac, heir of the Covenant.\n\n\"If children, _then heirs_.\" Future destiny turns upon present\ncharacter. The Spirit of God's Son, with His fruit of love and peace,\nis \"the earnest of our inheritance, sealing us against the day of\nredemption\" (Eph. i. 14; iv. 30). By selfish tempers and fleshly\nindulgences He is driven from the soul; and Losing Him, it is shut\nout from the kingdom of grace on earth, and from the glory of the\nredeemed. \"There shall in no wise enter into it anything unclean;\"\nsuch is the excommunication written above the gate of the Heavenly\nCity (Rev. xxi. 27). This sentence of the Apocalypse puts a final\nseal upon the teaching of Scripture. The God of revelation is the\nHoly One; His Spirit is the Holy Spirit; His kingdom is the kingdom\nof the saints, whose atmosphere burns like fire against all impurity.\nConcerning the men of the flesh the Apostle can only say, \"Whose end\nis perdition\" (Phil. iii. 19).\n\nWriting to the Corinthians, Paul entreats his readers not to be\ndeceived upon this point (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; Eph. v. 5). It seems so\nobvious, so necessary a principle, that one wonders how it should\nbe mistaken, why he is compelled to reiterate it as he does in this\nplace. And yet this has been a common delusion. No form of religion\nhas escaped being touched by Antinomianism. It is the divorce of\npiety from morality. It is the disposition to think that ceremonial\nworks on the one hand, or faith on the other, supersede the ethical\nconditions of harmony with God. Foisting itself on evangelical\ndoctrine this error leads men to assume that salvation is the mere\npardon of sin. The sinner appears to imagine he is saved in order\nto remain a sinner. He treats God's mercy as a kind of bank, on\nwhich he may draw as often as his offences past or future may\nrequire. He does not understand that sanctification is the sequel of\njustification, that the evidence of a true pardon lies in a changed\nheart that loathes sin.\n\n(2) Of the opposite principle the Apostle states not the ultimate,\nbut the more immediate consequences. \"Led by the Spirit, _ye are not\nunder the law_\" (ver. 18); and \"Against such things--love, peace,\ngoodness, and the like--_there is no law_\" (ver. 23).\n\nThe declaration of ver. 18 is made with a certain abruptness.\nPaul has just said, in ver. 17, that the Spirit is the appointed\nantagonist _of the flesh_. And now he adds, that if we yield\nourselves to His influence we shall be no longer _under the law_.\nThis identification of sin and the law was established in ch. ii.\n16-18; iii. 10-22. The law by itself, the Apostle showed, does\nnot overcome sin, but aggravates it; it shuts men up the hopeless\nprisoners of their own past mis-doing. To be \"under law\" is to be\nin the position of Ishmael, the slave-born and finally outcast son,\nwhose nature and temper are of the flesh (ch. iv. 21-31). After all\nthis we can understand his writing _law_ for _sin_ in this passage,\njust as in 1 Cor. xv. 56 he calls \"the law the _power_ of sin.\" To be\nunder law was, in Paul's view, to be held consciously in the grasp\nof sin. This was the condition to which Legalism would reduce the\nGalatians. From this calamity the Spirit of Christ would keep them\nfree.\n\nThe phrase \"under law\" reminds us once more of the imperilled\nliberty of the Galatians. Their spiritual freedom and their moral\nsafety were assailed in common. In ver. 16 he had said, \"Let the\nHoly Spirit guide you, and you will vanquish sin\"; and now, \"By\nthe same guidance you will escape the oppressive yoke of the law.\"\nFreedom from sin, freedom from the Jewish law--these two liberties\nwere virtually one. \"Sin shall not lord it over you, because ye are\nnot under law, but under grace\" (Rom. vi. 14). Ver. 23 explains this\ndouble freedom. Those who possess the Spirit of Christ bear His\nmoral fruits. Their life fulfils the demands of the law, _without\nbeing due to its compulsion_. Law can say nothing against them. It\ndid not produce this fruit; but it is bound to approve it. It has no\nhold on the men of the Spirit, no charge to bring against them. Its\nrequirements are satisfied; its constraints and threatenings are laid\naside.\n\nLaw therefore, in its Judaistic sense and application, has been\nabolished since \"faith has come.\" No longer does it rule the soul\nby fear and compulsion. This office, necessary once for the infant\nheirs of the Covenant, it has no right to exercise over spiritual\nmen. Law cannot give life (ch. iii. 21). This is the prerogative of\nthe Spirit of God. Law says, \"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God;\"\nbut it never inspired such love in any man's breast. If he does so\nlove, the law approves him, without claiming credit to itself for the\nfact. If he does not love his God, law condemns him and brands him a\ntransgressor. But \"the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts _by\nthe Holy Ghost_.\" The teaching of this paragraph on the relation of\nthe believer in Christ to God's law is summed up in the words of Rom.\nviii. 2: \"The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free\nfrom the law of sin and death.\" Law has become my friend, instead of\nmy enemy and accuser. For God's Spirit fills my soul with the love in\nwhich its fulfilment is contained. And now eternal life is the goal\nthat stands in my view, in place of the death with the prospect of\nwhich, as a man of the flesh, the law appalled me.\n\nIII. We see then that _deliverance from sin belongs_ not to the\nsubjects of the law, but _to the freemen of the Spirit_. This\ndeliverance, promised in ver. 16, is declared in ver. 24 as an\naccomplished fact. \"Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the\nlust of the flesh.... They that are of Christ Jesus have crucified\nthe flesh with its passions and its lusts.\" The tyranny of the flesh\nis ended for those who are \"in Christ Jesus.\" His cross has slain\ntheir sins. The entrance of His Spirit imports the death of all\ncarnal affections.\n\n\"They who are Christ's did crucify the flesh.\" This is the moral\napplication of Paul's mystical doctrine, central to all his theology,\nof the believer's union with the Redeemer (see Chapter X, pp.\n156-160). \"Christ in me--I in Him:\" there is Paul's secret. He was\n\"one spirit\" with Jesus Christ--dying, risen, ascended, reigning,\nreturning in glory. His old self, his old world was dead and\ngone--slain by Christ's cross, buried in His grave (ch. ii. 20; vi.\n14). And the flesh, common to the evil world and the evil self--that\nabove all was crucified. The death of shame and legal penalty, the\ncurse of God had overtaken it in the death of Jesus Christ. Christ\nhas risen, the \"Lord of the Spirit\" (2 Cor. iii. 18), who \"could not\nbe holden\" by the death which fell on \"the body of His flesh.\" They\nwho are Christ's rose with Him; while \"the flesh of sin\" stays in His\ngrave. Faith sees it there, and leaves it there. We \"reckon ourselves\ndead unto sin, and living unto God, in Christ Jesus.\" For such men,\nthe flesh that was once--imperious, importunate, law-defying--is no\nmore. It has received its death-stroke. \"God, sending His own Son\nin the likeness of sinful flesh and a sacrifice for sin, _condemned\nsin in the flesh_\" (Rom. viii. 3). Sin is smitten with the lightning\nof His anger. Doom has taken hold of it. Destroyed already in\nprinciple, it only waits for men to know this and to understand what\nhas been done, till it shall perish everywhere. The destruction of\nthe sinful flesh--more strictly of \"sin in the flesh\"--occurred, as\nPaul understood the matter, virtually and potentially in the moment\nof Christ's death. It was our human flesh that was crucified in\nHim--slain on the cross because, though in Him not personally sinful,\nyet in us with whom He had made Himself one, it was steeped in sin.\nOur sinful flesh hung upon His cross; it has risen, cleansed and\nsanctified, from His grave.\n\nWhat was then accomplished in principle when \"One died for all,\"\nis realised in point of fact when we are \"baptized into His\ndeath\"--when, that is to say, faith makes His death ours and its\nvirtue passes into the soul. The scene of the cross is inwardly\nrehearsed. The wounds which pierced the Redeemer's flesh and spirit\nnow pierce our consciences. It is a veritable crucifixion through\nwhich the soul enters into communion with its risen Saviour, and\nlearns to live His life. Nor is its sanctification complete till it\nis \"conformed unto His death\" (Phil. iii. 10). So with all his train\nof \"passions and of lusts,\" the \"old man\" is fastened and nailed down\nupon the new, interior Calvary, set up in each penitent and believing\nheart. The flesh may still, as in these Galatians, give mournful\nevidence of life. But it has no right to exist a single hour. _De\njure_ it is dead--dead in the reckoning of faith. It may die a\nlingering, protracted death, and make convulsive struggles; but die\nit must in all who are of Christ Jesus.\n\n * * * * *\n\nLet the Galatians consider what their calling of God signified. Let\nthem recall the prospects which opened before them in the days of\ntheir first faith in Christ, the love that glowed in their hearts,\nthe energy with which the Holy Spirit wrought upon their nature. Let\nthem know how truly they were called to liberty, and in good earnest\nwere made sons of God. They have only to continue as heretofore to be\nled by the Spirit of Christ and to march forward along the path on\nwhich they had entered, and neither Jewish law nor their own lawless\nflesh will be able to bring them into bondage. \"Where the Spirit of\nthe Lord is, there is liberty.\" Where He is not, there is legalism,\nor licence; or, it may be, both at once.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIV.\n\n_THE WORKS OF THE FLESH._\n\n \"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are _these_,\n fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery,\n enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions,\n parties, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of\n the which I forewarn you, even as I did forewarn you, that they\n which practise such things shall not inherit the kingdom of\n God.\"--GAL. v. 19-21.\n\n\nThe tree is known by its fruits: the flesh by its \"works.\" And\nthese works are \"manifest.\" The field of the world--\"this present\nevil world\" (ch. i. 4)--exhibits them in rank abundance. Perhaps at\nno time was the civilised world so depraved and godless as in the\nfirst century of the Christian era, when Tiberius, Caligula, Nero,\nDomitian, wore the imperial purple and posed as masters of the earth.\nIt was the cruelty and vileness of the times which culminated in\nthese deified monsters. By no accident was mankind cursed at this\nepoch with such a race of rulers. The world that worshipped them was\nworthy of them. Vice appeared in its most revolting and abandoned\nforms. Wickedness was rampant and triumphant. The age of the early\nRoman Empire has left a foul mark in human history and literature.\nLet Tacitus and Juvenal speak for it.\n\nPaul's enumeration of the current vices in this passage has however\na character of its own. It differs from the descriptions drawn by\nthe same hand in other Epistles; and this difference is due doubtless\nto the character of his readers. Their temperament was sanguine;\ntheir disposition frank and impulsive. Sins of lying and injustice,\nconspicuous in other lists, are not found in this. From these vices\nthe Galatic nature was comparatively free. Sensual sins and sins\nof passion--_unchastity_, _vindictiveness_, _intemperance_--occupy\nthe field. To these must be added _idolatry_, common to the Pagan\nworld. Gentile idolatry was allied with the practice of impurity on\nthe one side; and on the other, through the evil of \"sorcery,\" with\n\"enmities\" and \"jealousies.\" So that these works of the flesh belong\nto four distinct types of depravity; three of which come under the\nhead of immorality, while the fourth is the universal principle of\nPagan irreligion, being in turn both cause and effect of the moral\ndebasement connected with it.\n\nI. \"The works of the flesh are these--_fornication_, _uncleanness_,\n_lasciviousness_.\" A dark beginning! Sins of impurity find a place\nin every picture of Gentile morals given by the Apostle. In whatever\ndirection he writes--to Romans or Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians,\nor Thessalonians--it is always necessary to warn against these\nevils. They are equally \"manifest\" in heathen literature. The extent\nto which they stain the pages of the Greek and Roman classics sets\na heavy discount against their value as instruments of Christian\neducation. Civilised society in Paul's day was steeped in sexual\ncorruption.\n\n_Fornication_ was practically universal. Few were found, even among\nsevere moralists, to condemn it. The overthrow of the splendid\nclassical civilisation, due to the extinction of manly virtues in the\ndominant race, may be traced largely to this cause. Brave men are\nthe sons of pure women. John in the Apocalypse has written on the\nbrow of Rome, \"the great city which reigneth over the kings of the\nearth,\" this legend: \"_Babylon the great, mother of harlots_\" (Rev.\nxvii. 5). Whatever symbolic meaning the saying has, in its literal\nsense it was terribly true. Our modern Babylons, unless they purge\nthemselves, may earn the same title and the same doom.\n\nIn writing to Corinth, the metropolis of Greek licentiousness, Paul\ndeals very solemnly and explicitly with this vice. He teaches that\nthis sin, above others, is committed \"against the man's own body.\" It\nis a prostitution of the physical nature which Jesus Christ wore and\nstill wears, which He claims for the temple of His Spirit, and will\nraise from the dead to share His immortality. Impurity degrades the\nbody, and it affronts in an especial degree \"the Holy Spirit which we\nhave from God.\" Therefore it stands first amongst these \"works of the\nflesh\" in which it shows itself hostile and repugnant to the Spirit\nof our Divine sonship. \"Joined to the harlot\" in \"one body,\" the vile\noffender gives himself over in compact and communion to the dominion\nof the flesh, as truly as he who is \"joined to the Lord\" is \"one\nspirit with Him\" (1 Cor. vi. 13-20).\n\nOn this subject it is difficult to speak faithfully and yet directly.\nThere are many happily in our sheltered Christian homes who scarcely\nknow of the existence of this heathenish vice, except as it is named\nin Scripture. To them it is an evil of the past, a nameless thing of\ndarkness. And it is well it should be so. Knowledge of its horrors\nmay be suitable for seasoned social reformers, and necessary to\nthe publicist who must understand the worst as well as the best\nof the world he has to serve; but common decency forbids its being\nput within the reach of boys and innocent maidens. Newspapers and\nnovels which reek of the divorce-court and trade in the garbage of\nhuman life, in \"things of which it is a shame even to speak,\" are\nno more fit for ordinary consumption than the air of the pest-house\nis for breathing. They are sheer poison to the young imagination,\nwhich should be fed on whatsoever things are honourable and pure and\nlovely. But bodily self-respect must be learned in good time. Modesty\nof feeling and chastity of speech must adorn our youth. \"Let marriage\nbe honourable in the eyes of all,\" let the old chivalrous sentiments\nof reverence and gentleness towards women be renewed in our sons, and\nour country's future is safe. Perhaps in our revolt from Mariolatry\nwe Protestants have too much forgotten the honour paid by Jesus to\nthe Virgin Mother, and the sacredness which His birth has conferred\non motherhood. \"Blessed,\" said the heavenly voice, \"art thou among\nwomen.\" All our sisters are blessed and dignified in her, the holy\n\"mother of our Lord\" (Luke i. 42, 43).[142]\n\n [142] Comp., 1 Tim. ii. 13-15: _saved through the\n childbearing_--_i.e._, surely, the bearing of the Child Jesus,\n _the seed of the woman_.\n\nWherever, and in whatever form, the offence exists which violates\nthis relationship, Paul's fiery interdict is ready to be launched\nupon it. The anger of Jesus burned against this sin. In the wanton\nlook He discerns the crime of adultery, which in the Mosaic law was\npunished with death by stoning. \"The Lord is an avenger in all these\nthings\"--in everything that touches the honour of the human person\nand the sanctity of wedded life (1 Thess. iv. 1-8). The interests\nthat abet whoredom should find in the Church of Jesus Christ an\norganization pledged to relentless war against them. The man known\nto practise this wickedness is an enemy of Christ and of his race.\nHe should be shunned as we would shun a notorious liar--or a fallen\nwoman. Paul's rule is explicit, and binding on all Christians,\nconcerning \"the fornicator, the drunkard, the extortioner--with such\na one no, not to eat\" (1 Cor. v. 9-11). That Church little deserves\nthe name of a Church of Christ, which has not means of discipline\nsufficient to fence its communion from the polluting presence of\n\"such a one.\"\n\n_Uncleanness_ and _lasciviousness_ are companions of the more\nspecific impurity. The former is the general quality of this class\nof evils, and includes whatever is contaminating in word or look, in\ngesture or in dress, in thought or sentiment. \"Lasciviousness\" is\nuncleanness open and shameless. The filthy jest, the ogling glance,\nthe debauched and sensual face, these tell their own tale; they speak\nof a soul that has rolled in corruption till respect for virtue has\ndied out of it. In this direction \"the works of the flesh\" can go no\nfurther. A lascivious human creature is loathsomeness itself. To see\nit is like looking through a door into hell.\n\nA leading critic of our own times has, under this word of Paul's, put\nhis finger upon the plague-spot in the national life of our Gallic\nneighbours--_Aselgeia_, or Wantonness. There may be a certain truth\nin this charge. Their disposition in several respects resembles that\nof Paul's Galatians. But we can scarcely afford to reproach others\non this score. English society is none too clean. _Home_ is for our\npeople everywhere, thank God, the nursery of innocence. But outside\nits shelter, and beyond the reach of the mother's voice, how many\nperils await the weak and unwary. In the night-streets of the city\nthe \"strange woman\" spreads her net, \"whose feet go down to death.\"\nIn workshops and business-offices too often coarse and vile language\ngoes on unchecked, and one unchaste mind will infect a whole circle.\nSchools, wanting in moral discipline, may become seminaries of\nimpurity. There are crowded quarters in large towns, and wretched\ntenements in many a country village, where the conditions of life\nare such that decency is impossible; and a soil is prepared in which\nsexual sin grows rankly. To cleanse these channels of social life is\nindeed a task of Hercules; but the Church of Christ is loudly called\nto it. Her vocation is in itself a purity crusade, a war declared\nagainst \"all filthiness of flesh and spirit.\"\n\nII. Next to _lust_ in this procession of the Vices comes _idolatry_.\nIn Paganism they were associated by many ties. Some of the most\nrenowned and popular cults of the day were open purveyors of\nsensuality and lent to it the sanctions of religion. Idolatry\nis found here in fit company (comp. 1 Cor. x. 6-8). Peter's\nFirst Epistle, addressed to the Galatian with other Asiatic\nChurches, speaks of \"the desire of the Gentiles\" as consisting in\n\"lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and\n_abominable idolatries_\" (ch. iv. 3).\n\nIdolatry forms the centre of the awful picture of Gentile depravity\ndrawn by our Apostle in his letter to Rome (ch. i.). It is, as\nhe there shows, the outcome of man's native antipathy to the\nknowledge of God. Willingly men \"took lies in the place of truth,\nand served the creature rather than the Creator.\" They merged God\nin nature, debasing the spiritual conception of the Deity with\nfleshly attributes. This blending of God with the world gave rise,\namongst the mass of mankind, to Polytheism; while in the minds of\nthe more reflective it assumed a Pantheistic shape. The manifold of\nnature, absorbing the Divine, broke it up into \"gods many and lords\nmany\"--gods of the earth and sky and ocean, gods and goddesses of\nwar, of tillage, of love, of art, of statecraft and handicraft,\npatrons of human vices and follies as well as of excellencies,\nchanging with every climate and with the varying moods and conditions\nof their worshippers. No longer did it appear that God made man\nin His image; now men made gods in \"the likeness of the image of\ncorruptible man, and of winged and four-footed and creeping things.\"\n\nWhen at last under the Roman Empire the different Pagan races blended\ntheir customs and faiths, and \"the Orontes flowed into the Tiber,\"\nthere came about a perfect chaos of religions. Gods Greek and Roman,\nPhrygian, Syrian, Egyptian jostled each other in the great cities--a\n_colluvies deorum_ more bewildering even than the _colluvies\ngentium_,--each cultus striving to outdo the rest in extravagance and\nlicence. The system of classic Paganism was reduced to impotence. The\nfalse gods destroyed each other. The mixture of heathen religions,\nnone of them pure, produced complete demoralisation.\n\nThe Jewish monotheism remained, the one rock of human faith in the\nmidst of this dissolution of the old nature-creeds. Its conception\nof the Godhead was not so much metaphysical as ethical. \"Hear O\nIsrael,\" says every Jew to his fellows, \"the Lord our God is one\nLord.\" But that \"one Lord\" was also \"_the Holy One_ of Israel.\"\nLet his holiness be sullied, let the thought of the Divine ethical\ntranscendence suffer eclipse, and He sinks back again into the\nmanifold of nature. Till God was manifest in the flesh through the\nsinless Christ, it was impossible to conceive of a perfect purity\nallied to the natural. To the mind of the Israelite, God's holiness\nwas one with the _aloneness_ in which he held Himself sublimely aloof\nfrom all material forms, one with the pure spirituality of His being.\n\"There is none holy save the Lord; neither is there any rock like our\nGod:\" such was his lofty creed. On this ground prophecy carried on\nits inspired struggle against the tremendous forces of naturalism.\nWhen at length the victory of spiritual religion was gained in\nIsrael, unbelief assumed another form; the knowledge of the Divine\nunity hardened into a sterile and fanatic legalism, into the idolatry\nof dogma and tradition; and Scribe and Pharisee took the place of\nProphet and of Psalmist.\n\nThe idolatry and immorality of the Gentile world had a common root.\nGod's anger, the Apostle declared, blazed forth equally against both\n(Rom. i. 18). The monstrous forms of uncleanness then prevalent were\na fitting punishment, an inevitable consequence of heathen impiety.\nThey marked the lowest level to which human nature can fall in\nits apostasy from God. Self-respect in man is ultimately based on\nreverence for the Divine. Disowning his Maker, he degrades himself.\nBent on evil, he must banish from his soul that warning, protesting\nimage of the Supreme Holiness in which he was created.\n\n \"He tempts his reason to deny\n God whom his passions dare defy.\"\n\n\"They did not like to retain God in their knowledge.\" \"They loved\ndarkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.\" These\nare terrible accusations. But the history of natural religion\nconfirms their truth.\n\n_Sorcery_ is the attendant of idolatry. A low, naturalistic\nconception of the Divine lends itself to immoral purposes. Men try\nto operate upon it by material causes, and to make it a partner in\nevil. Such is the origin of magic. Natural objects deemed to possess\nsupernatural attributes, as the stars and the flight of birds, have\ndivine omens ascribed to them. Drugs of occult power, and things\ngrotesque or curious made mysterious by the fancy, are credited with\ninfluence over the Nature-gods. From the use of drugs in incantations\nand exorcisms the word _pharmakeia_, here denoting _sorcery_, took\nits meaning. The science of chemistry has destroyed a world of magic\nconnected with the virtues of herbs. These superstitions formed a\nchief branch of sorcery and witchcraft, and have flourished under\nmany forms of idolatry. And the magical arts were common instruments\nof malice. The sorcerer's charms were in requisition, as in the case\nof Balaam, to curse one's enemies, to weave some spell that should\ninvolve them in destruction. Accordingly _sorcery_ finds its place\nthere between _idolatry_ and _enmities_.\n\nIII. On this latter head the Apostle enlarges with edifying\namplitude. _Enmities_, _strife_, _jealousies_, _ragings_, _factions_,\n_divisions_, _parties_, _envyings_--what a list! Eight out of fifteen\nof \"the works of the flesh manifest\" to Paul in writing to Galatia\nbelong to this one category. The Celt all over the world is known\nfor a hot-tempered fellow. He has high capabilities; he is generous,\nenthusiastic, and impressionable. Meanness and treachery are foreign\nto his nature. But he is _irritable_. And it is in a vain and\nirritable disposition that these vices are engendered. Strife and\ndivision have been proverbial in the history of the Gallic nations.\nTheir jealous temper has too often neutralised their engaging\nqualities; and their quickness and cleverness have for this reason\navailed them but little in competition with more phlegmatic races. In\nHighland clans, in Irish septs, in French wars and Revolutions the\nsame moral features reappear which are found in this delineation of\nGalatic life. This persistence of character in the races of mankind\nis one of the most impressive facts of history.\n\n\"Enmities\" are private hatreds or family feuds, which break out\nopenly in \"strife.\" This is seen in Church affairs, when men take\nopposite sides not so much from any decided difference of judgement,\nas from personal dislike and the disposition to thwart an opponent.\n\"Jealousies\" and \"wraths\" (or \"rages\") are passions attending enmity\nand strife. There is _jealousy_ where one's antagonist is a rival,\nwhose success is felt as a wrong to oneself. This may be a silent\npassion, repressed by pride but consuming the mind inwardly. _Rage_\nis the open eruption of anger which, when powerless to inflict\ninjury, will find vent in furious language and menacing gestures.\nThere are natures in which these tempests of rage take a perfectly\ndemonic form. The face grows livid, the limbs move convulsively, the\nnervous organism is seized by a storm of frenzy; and until it has\npassed, the man is literally beside himself. Such exhibitions are\ntruly appalling. They are \"works of the flesh\" in which, yielding to\nits own ungoverned impulse, it gives itself up to be possessed by\nSatan and is \"set on fire of hell.\"\n\n_Factions_, _divisions_, _parties_ are words synonymous. \"Divisions\"\nis the more neutral term, and represents the state into which\na community is thrown by the working of the spirit of strife.\n\"Factions\" imply more of self-interest and policy in those concerned;\n\"parties\" are due rather to self-will and opinionativeness. The\nGreek word employed in this last instance, as in 1 Cor. xi. 19, has\nbecome our _heresies_. It does not imply of necessity any doctrinal\ndifference as the ground of the party distinctions in question. At\nthe same time, this expression is an advance on those foregoing,\npointing to such divisions as have grown, or threaten to grow into\n\"distinct and organized parties\" (Lightfoot).\n\n_Envyings_ (or _grudges_) complete this bitter series. This\nterm might have found a place beside \"enmities\" and \"strife.\"\nStanding where it does, it seems to denote the rankling anger, the\npersistent ill-will caused by party-feuds. The Galatian quarrels\nleft behind them grudges and resentments which became inveterate.\nThese \"envyings,\" the fruit of old contentions, were in turn the\nseed of new strife. Settled rancour is the last and worst form of\ncontentiousness. It is so much more culpable than \"jealousy\" or\n\"rage,\" as it has not the excuse of personal conflict; and it does\nnot subside, as the fiercest outburst of passion may, leaving room\nfor forgiveness. It nurses its revenge, waiting, like Shylock, for\nthe time when it shall \"feed fat its ancient grudge.\"\n\n\"Where jealousy and faction are, there,\" says James, \"is confusion\nand every vile deed.\" This was the state of things to which the\nGalatian societies were tending. The Judaizers had sown the seeds\nof discord, and it had fallen on congenial soil. Paul has already\ninvoked Christ's law of love to exorcise this spirit of destruction\n(vv. 13-15). He tells the Galatians that their vainglorious and\nprovoking attitude towards each other and their envious disposition\nare entirely contrary to the life in the Spirit which they professed\nto lead (vv. 25, 26), and fatal to the existence of the Church. These\nwere the \"passions of the flesh\" which most of all they needed to\ncrucify.\n\nIV. Finally, we come to sins of intemperance--_drunkenness,\nrevellings, and the like_.\n\nThese are the vices of a barbarous people. Our Teutonic and Celtic\nforefathers were alike prone to this kind of excess. Peter warns\nthe Galatians against \"wine-bibbings, revellings, carousings.\" The\npassion for strong drink, along with \"lasciviousness\" and \"lusts\"\non the one hand, and \"abominable idolatries\" on the other, had in\nAsia Minor swelled into a \"cataclysm of riot,\" overwhelming the\nGentile world (1 Pet. iv. 3, 4). The Greeks were a comparatively\nsober people. The Romans were more notorious for gluttony than for\nhard drinking. The practice of seeking pleasure in intoxication is\na remnant of savagery, which exists to a shameful extent in our own\ncountry. It appears to have been prevalent with the Galatians, whose\nancestors a few generations back were northern barbarians.\n\nA strong and raw animal nature is in itself a temptation to this\nvice. For men exposed to cold and hardship, the intoxicating cup\nhas a potent fascination. The flesh, buffeted by the fatigues of a\nrough day's work, finds a strange zest in its treacherous delights.\nThe man \"drinks and forgets his poverty, and remembers his misery no\nmore.\" For the hour, while the spell is upon him, he is a king; he\nlives under another sun; the world's wealth is his. He wakes up to\nfind himself a sot! With racked head and unstrung frame he returns to\nthe toil and squalor of his life, adding new wretchedness to that\nhe had striven to forget. Anon he says, \"I will seek it yet again!\"\nWhen the craving has once mastered him, its indulgence becomes his\nonly pleasure. Such men deserve our deepest pity. They need for their\nsalvation all the safeguards that Christian sympathy and wisdom can\nthrow around them.\n\nThere are others \"given to much wine,\" for whom one feels less\ncompassion. Their convivial indulgences are a part of their general\nhabits of luxury and sensuality, an open, flagrant triumph of the\nflesh over the Spirit. These sinners require stern rebuke and\nwarning. They must understand that \"those who practise such things\nshall not inherit the kingdom of God,\" that \"he who soweth to his own\nflesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption.\" Of these and their like\nit was that Jesus said, \"Woe unto you that laugh now; for ye shall\nmourn and weep.\"\n\nOur British Churches at the present time are more alive to this\nthan perhaps to any other social evil. They are setting themselves\nsternly against drunkenness, and none too soon. Of all the works\nof the flesh this has been, if not the most potent, certainly the\nmost conspicuous in the havoc it has wrought amongst us. Its ruinous\neffects are \"manifest\" in every prison and asylum, and in the private\nhistory of innumerable families in every station of life. Who is\nthere that has not lost a kinsman, a friend, or at least a neighbour\nor acquaintance, whose life was wrecked by this accursed passion?\nMuch has been done, and is doing, to check its ravages. But more\nremains to be accomplished before civil law and public opinion shall\nfurnish all the protection against this evil necessary for a people\nso tempted by climate and by constitution as our own.\n\nWith _fornication_ at the beginning and _drunkenness_ at the end,\nPaul's description of \"the works of the flesh\" is, alas! far indeed\nfrom being out of date. The dread procession of the Vices marches\non before our eyes. Races and temperaments vary; science has\ntransformed the visible aspect of life; but the ruling appetites of\nhuman nature are unchanged, its primitive vices are with us to-day.\nThe complicated problems of modern life, the gigantic evils which\nconfront our social reformers, are simply the primeval corruptions of\nmankind in a new guise--the old lust and greed and hate. Under his\nveneer of manners, the civilized European, untouched by the grace of\nthe Holy Spirit of God, is still apt to be found a selfish, cunning,\nunchaste, revengeful, superstitious creature, distinguished from his\nbarbarian progenitor chiefly by his better dress and more cultivated\nbrain, and his inferior agility. Witness the great Napoleon, a very\n\"god of this world,\" but in all that gives worth to character no\nbetter than a savage!\n\nWith Europe turned into one vast camp and its nations groaning\naudibly under the weight of their armaments, with hordes of degraded\nwomen infesting the streets of its cities, with discontent and social\nhatred smouldering throughout its industrial populations, we have\nsmall reason to boast of the triumphs of modern civilisation. Better\ncircumstances do not make better men. James' old question has for our\nday a terrible pertinence: \"Whence come wars and fightings among you?\nCome they not hence, even of your pleasures that war in your members?\nYe lust, and have not: ye kill, and covet, and cannot obtain. Ye ask\nand receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may spend it on your\npleasures.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXV.\n\n_THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT._\n\n \"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering,\n kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such\n there is no law.\"--GAL. v. 22, 23.\n\n\n\"The tree is known by its fruits.\" Such was the criterion of\nreligious profession laid down by the Founder of Christianity.\nThis test His religion applies in the first instance to itself. It\nproclaims a final judgement for all men; it submits itself to the\npresent judgement of all men--a judgement resting in each case on the\nsame ground, namely that of _fruit_, of moral issue and effects. For\ncharacter is the true _summum bonum_; it is the thing which in our\nsecret hearts and in our better moments we all admire and covet. The\ncreed which produces the best and purest character, in the greatest\nabundance and under the most varied conditions, is that which the\nworld will believe.\n\nThese verses contain the ideal of character furnished by the gospel\nof Christ. Here is the religion of Jesus put in practice. These are\nthe sentiments and habits, the views of duty, the temper of mind,\nwhich faith in Jesus Christ tends to form. Paul's conception of the\nideal human life at once \"commends itself to every man's conscience.\"\nAnd he owed it to the gospel of Christ. His ethics are the fruit of\nhis dogmatic faith. What other system of belief has produced a like\nresult, or has formed in men's minds ideas of duty so reasonable\nand gracious, so just, so balanced and perfect, and above all so\npracticable, as those inculcated in the Apostle's teaching?\n\n\"Men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles.\" Thoughts\nof this kind, lives of this kind, are not the product of imposture or\ndelusion. The \"works\" of systems of error are \"manifest\" in the moral\nwrecks they leave behind them, strewing the track of history. But the\nvirtues here enumerated are the fruits which the Spirit of Christ\nhas brought forth, and brings forth at this day more abundantly than\never. As a theory of morals, a representation of what is best in\nconduct, Christian teaching has held for 1800 years an unrivalled\nplace. Christ and His Apostles are still the masters of morality.\nFew have been bold enough to offer any improvements on the ethics\nof Jesus; and smaller still has been the acceptance which their\nproposals have obtained. The new idea of virtue which Christianity\nhas given to the world, the energy it has imparted to the moral will,\nthe immense and beneficial revolutions it has brought about in human\nsociety, supply a powerful argument for its divinity. Making every\ndeduction for unfaithful Christians, who dishonour \"the worthy name\"\nthey bear, still \"the fruit of the Spirit\" gathered in these eighteen\ncenturies is a glorious witness to the virtue of the tree of life\nfrom which it grew.\n\nThis picture of the Christian life takes its place side by side\nwith others found in Paul's Epistles. It recalls the figure of\nCharity in 1 Cor. xiii., acknowledged by moralists of every school\nto be a master-piece of characterization. It stands in line also\nwith the oft-quoted enumeration of Phil. iv. 8: \"Whatsoever things\nare true, whatsoever things are reverend, whatsoever things are\njust, whatsoever things are chaste, whatsoever things are lovely,\nwhatsoever things are kindly spoken, if there be any virtue, and if\nthere be any praise, think on these things.\" These representations do\nnot pretend to theoretical completeness. It would be easy to specify\nimportant virtues not mentioned in the Apostle's categories. His\ndescriptions have a practical aim, and press on the attention of his\nreaders the special forms and qualities of virtue demanded from them,\nunder the given circumstances, by their faith in Christ.\n\nIt is interesting to compare the Apostle's definitions with Plato's\ncelebrated scheme of the four cardinal virtues. They are _wisdom_,\n_courage_, _temperance_, with _righteousness_ as the union and\nco-ordination of the other three. The difference between the cast of\nthe Platonic and Pauline ethics is most instructive. In the Apostle's\ncatalogue the first two of the philosophical virtues are wanting;\nunless \"courage\" be included, as it properly may, under the name of\n\"virtue\" in the Philippian list. With the Greek thinker, _wisdom_\nis the fundamental excellence of the soul. Knowledge is in his view\nthe supreme desideratum, the guarantee for moral health and social\nwell-being. The philosopher is the perfect man, the proper ruler of\nthe commonwealth. Intellectual culture brings in its train ethical\nimprovement. For \"no man is knowingly vicious:\" such was the dictum\nof Socrates, the father of Philosophy. In the ethics of the gospel,\n_love_ becomes the chief of virtues, parent of the rest.\n\n_Love_ and _humility_ are the two features whose predominance\ndistinguishes the Christian from the purest classical conceptions\nof moral worth. The ethics of Naturalism know love as a passion, a\nsensuous instinct (\u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2); or again, as the personal affection which\nbinds friend to friend through common interest or resemblance of\ntaste and disposition (\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1). Love in its highest sense (\u1f00\u03b3\u03ac\u03c0\u03b7)\nChristianity has re-discovered, finding in it a universal law for the\nreason and spirit. It assigns to this principle a like place to that\nwhich gravitation holds in the material universe, as the attraction\nwhich binds each man to his Maker and to his fellows. Its obligations\nneutralise self-interest and create a spiritual solidarity of\nmankind, centring in Christ, the God-man. Pre-Christian philosophy\nexalted the intellect, but left the heart cold and vacant, and the\ndeeper springs of will untouched. It was reserved for Jesus Christ to\nteach men how to love, and in love to find the law of freedom.\n\nIf love was wanting in natural ethics, _humility_ was positively\nexcluded. The pride of philosophy regarded it as a vice rather than\na virtue. \"Lowliness\" is ranked with \"pettiness\" and \"repining\"\nand \"despondency\" as the product of \"littleness of soul.\" On the\ncontrary, the man of lofty soul is held up to admiration, who is\n\"worthy of great things and deems himself so,\"--who is \"not given to\nwonder, for nothing seems great to him,\"--who is \"ashamed to receive\nbenefits,\" and \"has the appearance indeed of being supercilious\"\n(Aristotle). How far removed is this model from our Example who has\nsaid, \"Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.\" The classical\nidea of virtue is based on the greatness of man; the Christian, on\nthe goodness of God. Before the Divine glory in Jesus Christ the\nsoul of the believer bows in adoration. It is humbled at the throne\nof grace, chastened into self-forgetting. It gazes on this Image of\nlove and holiness, till it repeats itself within the heart.\n\n * * * * *\n\nNine virtues are woven together in this golden chain of the Holy\nSpirit's fruit. They fall into three groups of three, four, and two\nrespectively--according as they refer primarily to God, _love_,\n_joy_, _peace_; to one's fellow-men, _longsuffering_, _kindness_,\n_goodness_, _faith_; and to oneself, _meekness_, _temperance_. But\nthe successive qualities are so closely linked and pass into one\nanother with so little distance, that it is undesirable to emphasize\nthe analysis; and while bearing the above distinctions in mind, we\nshall seek to give to each of the nine graces its separate place in\nthe catalogue.\n\n1. _The fruit of the Spirit is love._ That fitliest first. Love is\nthe Alpha and Omega of the Apostle's thoughts concerning the new\nlife in Christ. This queen of graces is already enthroned within\nthis chapter. In ver. 6 Love came forward to be the minister of\nFaith; in ver. 14 it reappeared as the ruling principle of Divine\nlaw. These two offices of love are united here, where it becomes\nthe prime fruit of the Holy Spirit of God, to whom the heart is\nopened by the act of faith, and who enables us to keep God's law.\nLove is \"the fulfilling of the law;\" for it is the essence of the\ngospel; it is the spirit of sonship; without this Divine affection,\nno profession of faith, no practice of good works has any value in\nthe sight of God or intrinsic moral worth. Though I have all other\ngifts and merits--wanting this, \"I am nothing\" (1 Cor. xiii. 1-3).\nThe cold heart is dead. Whatever appears to be Christian that has not\nthe love of Christ, is an unreality--a matter of orthodox opinion\nor mechanical performance--dead as the body without the spirit. In\nall true goodness there is an element of love. Here then is the\nfountain-head of Christian virtue, the \"well of water springing up\ninto eternal life\" which Christ opens in the believing soul, from\nwhich flow so many bounteous streams of mercy and good fruits.\n\nThis love is, in the first instance and above all, _love to God_. It\nsprings from the knowledge of His love to man. \"God is love,\" and\n\"love is of God\" (1 John iv. 7, 8). All love flows from one fountain,\nfrom the One Father. And the Father's love is revealed in the Son.\nLove has the cross for its measure and standard. \"He sent the\nOnly-begotten into the world, that we might live through Him. Herein\nis love: hereby know we love\" (1 John iii. 16; iv. 9, 10). The man\nwho knows this love, whose heart responds to the manifestation of God\nin Christ, is \"born of God.\" His soul is ready to become the abode\nof all pure affections, his life the exhibition of all Christ-like\nvirtues. For the love of the Father is revealed to him; and the love\nof a son is enkindled in his soul by the Spirit of the Son.\n\nIn Paul's teaching, love forms the antithesis to _knowledge_. By\nthis opposition the wisdom of God is distinguished from \"the wisdom\nof this world and of its princes, which come to nought\" (1 Cor. i.\n23; ii. 8; viii. 1, 3). Not that love despises knowledge, or seeks\nto dispense with it. It requires knowledge beforehand in order to\ndiscern its object, and afterwards to understand its work. So the\nApostle prays for the Philippians \"that their love may abound yet\nmore and more in knowledge and all discernment\" (ch. i. 9, 10). It\nis not _love without knowledge_, heat without light, the warmth of\nan ignorant, untempered zeal that the Apostle desiderates. But he\ndeplores the existence of _knowledge without love_, a clear head with\na cold heart, an intellect whose growth has left the affections\nstarved and stunted, with enlightened apprehensions of truth that\nawaken no corresponding emotions. Hence comes the pride of reason,\nthe \"knowledge that puffeth up.\" Love alone knows the art of building\nup.\n\nLoveless knowledge is not wisdom. For wisdom is lowly in her own\neyes, mild and gracious. What the man of cold intellect sees, he\nsees clearly; he reasons on it well. But his data are defective. He\ndiscerns but the half, the poorer half of life. There is a whole\nheaven of facts of which he takes no account. He has an acute and\nsensitive perception of phenomena coming within the range of his five\nsenses, and of everything that logic can elicit from such phenomena.\nBut he \"cannot see afar off.\" Above all, \"he that loveth not,\n_knoweth not God_.\" He leaves out the Supreme Factor in human life;\nand all his calculations are vitiated. \"Hath not _God_ made foolish\nthe wisdom of the world?\"\n\nIf knowledge then is the enlightened eye, love is the throbbing,\nliving heart of Christian goodness.\n\n2. _The fruit of the Spirit is joy._ Joy dwells in the house of Love;\nnor elsewhere will she tarry.\n\nLove is the mistress both of joy and sorrow. Wronged, frustrated,\nhers is the bitterest of griefs. Love makes us capable of pain and\nshame; but equally of triumph and delight. Therefore the Lover of\nmankind was the \"Man of sorrows,\" whose love bared its breast to the\narrows of scorn and hate; and yet \"for the joy that was set before\nHim, He endured the cross, despising the shame.\" There was no sorrow\nlike that of Christ rejected and crucified; no joy like the joy of\nChrist risen and reigning. This joy, the delight of love satisfied\nin those it loves, is that whose fulfilment He has promised to His\ndisciples (John xv. 8-11).\n\nSuch joy the selfish heart never knows. Life's choicest blessings,\nheaven's highest favours fail to bring it happiness. Sensuous\ngratification, and even intellectual pleasure by itself wants the\ntrue note of gladness. There is nothing that thrills the whole\nnature, that stirs the pulses of life and sets them dancing, like\nthe touch of a pure love. It is the pearl of great price, for which\n\"if a man would give all the substance of his house, he would be\nutterly contemned.\" But of all the joys love gives to life, that is\nthe deepest which is ours when \"the love of God is shed abroad in\nour heart.\" Then the full tide of blessedness pours into the human\nspirit. Then we know of what happiness our nature was made capable,\nwhen we know the love that God hath toward us.\n\nThis joy in the Lord quickens and elevates, while it cleanses,\nall other emotions. It raises the whole temperature of the heart.\nIt gives a new glow to life. It lends a warmer and a purer tone\nto our natural affections. It sheds a diviner meaning, a brighter\naspect over the common face of earth and sky. It throws a radiance\nof hope upon the toils and weariness of mortality. It \"glories in\ntribulation.\" It triumphs in death. He who \"lives in the Spirit\"\ncannot be a dull, or peevish, or melancholy man. One with Christ his\nheavenly Lord, he begins already to taste His joy,--a joy which none\ntaketh away and which many sorrows cannot quench.\n\nJoy is the beaming countenance, the elastic step, the singing voice\nof Christian goodness.\n\n3. But joy is a thing of seasons. It has its ebb and flow, and would\nnot be itself if it were constant. It is crossed, varied, shadowed\nunceasingly. On earth sorrow ever follows in its track, as night\nchases day. No one knew this better than Paul. \"Sorrowful,\" he says\nof himself (2 Cor. vi. 10), \"yet always rejoicing:\" a continual\nalternation, sorrow threatening every moment to extinguish, but\nserving to enhance his joy. Joy leans upon her graver sister _Peace_.\n\nThere is nothing fitful or febrile in the quality of Peace. It is a\nsettled quiet of the heart, a deep, brooding mystery that \"passeth\nall understanding,\" the stillness of eternity entering the spirit,\nthe _Sabbath of God_ (Heb. iv. 9). It is theirs who are \"justified\nby faith\" (Rom. v. 1, 2). It is the bequest of Jesus Christ (John\nxiv. 27). He \"made peace for us through the blood of His cross.\" He\nhas reconciled us with the eternal law, with the Will that rules all\nthings without effort or disturbance. We pass from the region of\nmisrule and mad rebellion into the kingdom of the Son of God's love,\nwith its ordered freedom, its clear and tranquil light, its \"central\npeace, subsisting at the heart of endless agitation.\"\n\nAfter the war of the passions, after the tempests of doubt and fear,\nChrist has spoken, \"Peace, be still!\" A great calm spreads over the\ntroubled waters; wind and wave lie down hushed at His feet. The\ndemonic powers that lashed the soul into tumult, vanish before His\nholy presence. The Spirit of Jesus takes possession of mind and heart\nand will. And His fruit is peace--always peace. This one virtue takes\nthe place of the manifold forms of contention which make life a chaos\nand a misery. While He rules, \"the peace of God guards the heart and\nthoughts\" and holds them safe from inward mutiny or outward assault;\nand the dissolute, turbulent train of the works of the flesh find the\ngates of the soul barred against them.\n\nPeace is the calm, unruffled brow, the poised and even temper which\nChristian goodness wears.\n\n4. The heart at peace with God has patience with men. \"Charity\n_suffereth long_.\" She is not provoked by opposition; nor soured\nby injustice; no, nor crushed by men's contempt. She can afford to\nwait; for truth and love will conquer in the end. She knows in whose\nhand her cause is, and remembers how long _He_ has suffered the\nunbelief and rebellion of an insensate world; she \"considers Him that\nendured such contradiction of sinners against Himself.\" Mercy and\nlongsuffering are qualities that we share with God Himself, in which\nGod was, and is, \"manifest in the flesh.\" In this ripe fruit of the\nSpirit there are joined \"the love of God, and the patience of Christ\"\n(2 Thess. iii. 5).\n\nLongsuffering is the patient magnanimity of Christian goodness, the\nbroad shoulders on which it \"beareth all things\" (1 Cor. xiii. 7).\n\n5. \"Charity suffereth long and _is kind_.\"\n\n_Gentleness_ (or _kindness_, as the word is more frequently and\nbetter rendered,) resembles \"longsuffering\" in finding its chief\nobjects in the evil and unthankful. But while the latter is passive\nand self-contained, kindness is an active, busy virtue. She is\nmoreover of a humble and tender spirit, stooping to the lowest need,\nthinking nothing too small in which she may help, ready to give back\nblessing for cursing, benefit for harm and wrong.\n\nKindness is the thoughtful insight, the delicate tact, the gentle\nministering hand of Charity.\n\n6. Linked with _kindness_ comes _goodness_, which is its other self,\ndiffering from it only as twin sisters may, each fairer for the\nbeauty of the other. Goodness is perhaps more affluent, more catholic\nin its bounty; kindness more delicate and discriminating. The former\nlooks to the benefit conferred, seeking to make it as large and full\nas possible; the latter has respect to the recipients, and studies\nto suit their necessity. While kindness makes its opportunities, and\nseeks out the most needy and miserable, goodness throws its doors\nopen to all comers. Goodness is the more masculine and large-hearted\nform of charity; and if it errs, errs through blundering and\nwant of tact. Kindness is the more feminine; and may err through\nexclusiveness and narrowness of view. United, they are perfect.\n\nGoodness is the honest, generous face, the open hand of Charity.\n\n7. This procession of the Virtues has conducted us, in the order of\nDivine grace, from the thought of a loving, forgiving God, the Object\nof our _love_, our _joy_ and _peace_, to that of an evil-doing,\nunhappy world, with its need of _longsuffering_ and _kindness_;\nand we now come to the inner, sacred circle of brethren beloved in\nChrist, where, with goodness, _faith_--that is, _trustfulness_,\n_confidence_--is called into exercise.\n\nThe Authorised rendering \"faith\" seems to us in this instance\npreferable to the \"faithfulness\" of the Revisers. \"Possibly,\" says\nBishop Lightfoot:, \"\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 may here signify 'trustfulness, reliance,'\nin one's dealings with others; comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 7:\" we should\nprefer to say \"probably,\" or even \"unmistakably,\" to this. The use of\n_pistis_ in any other sense is rare and doubtful in Paul's Epistles.\nIt is true that \"God\" or \"Christ\" is elsewhere implied as the object\nof faith; but where the word stands, as it does here, in a series of\nqualities belonging to human relationships, it finds, in agreement\nwith its current meaning, another application. As a link between\n_goodness_ and _meekness_, _trustfulness,_ and nothing else, appears\nto be in place. The parallel expression of 1 Cor. xiii., of which\nchapter we find so many echoes in the text, we take to be decisive:\n\"Charity _believeth_ all things.\"\n\nThe faith that unites man to God, in turn joins man to his\nfellows. Faith in the Divine Fatherhood becomes trust in the\nhuman brotherhood. In this generous attribute the Galatians were\nsadly deficient. \"Honour all men,\" wrote Peter to them; \"love the\nbrotherhood\" (1 Pet. ii. 17). Their factiousness and jealousies were\nthe exact opposite of this fruit of the Spirit. Little was there\nto be found in them of the love that \"envieth and vaunteth not,\"\nwhich \"imputeth not evil, nor rejoiceth in unrighteousness,\" which\n\"beareth, believeth, hopeth, endureth all things.\" They needed more\nfaith in _man_, as well as in God.\n\nThe true heart knows how to _trust_. He who doubts every one is even\nmore deceived than the man who blindly confides in every one. There\nis no more miserable vice than cynicism; no man more ill-conditioned\nthan he who counts all the world knaves or fools except himself.\nThis poison of mistrust, this biting acid of scepticism is a fruit\nof irreligion. It is one of the surest signs of social and national\ndecay.\n\nThe Christian man knows not only how to stand alone and to \"bear all\nthings,\" but also how to lean on others, strengthening himself by\ntheir strength and supporting them in weakness. He delights to \"think\nothers better\" than himself; and here \"meekness\" is one with \"faith.\"\nHis own goodness gives him an eye for everything that is best in\nthose around him.\n\nTrustfulness is the warm, firm clasp of friendship, the generous and\nloyal homage which goodness ever pays to goodness.\n\n8. _Meekness_, as we have seen, is the other side of _faith_. It\nis not tameness and want of spirit, as those who \"judge after the\nflesh\" are apt to think. Nor is meekness the mere quietness of a\nretiring disposition. \"The man Moses was very meek, above all the\nmen which were upon the face of the earth.\" It comports with the\nhighest courage and activity; and is a qualification for public\nleadership. Jesus Christ stands before us as the perfect pattern of\nmeekness. \"I intreat you,\" pleads the Apostle with the self-asserting\nCorinthians, \"by the meekness and gentleness of Christ!\" Meekness\nis self-repression in view of the claims and needs of others; it is\nthe \"charity\" which \"seeketh not her own, looketh not to her own\nthings, but to the things of others.\" For her, self is of no account\nin comparison with Christ and His kingdom, and the honour of His\nbrethren.\n\nMeekness is the content and quiet mien, the willing self-effacement\nthat is the mark of Christlike goodness.\n\n9. Finally _temperance_, or _self-control_,--third of Plato's\ncardinal virtues.\n\nBy this last link the chain of the virtues, at its higher end\nattached to the throne of the Divine love and mercy, is fastened\nfirmly down into the actualities of daily habit and bodily regimen.\n_Temperance_, to change the figure, closes the array of the graces,\nholding the post of the rear-guard which checks all straggling and\nprotects the march from surprise and treacherous overthrow.\n\nIf _meekness_ is the virtue of the whole man as he stands before his\nGod and in the midst of his fellows, _temperance_ is that of his\nbody, the tenement and instrument of the regenerate spirit. It is the\nantithesis of \"drunkenness and revellings,\" which closed the list\nof \"works of the flesh,\" just as the preceding graces, from \"peace\"\nto \"meekness,\" are opposed to the multiplied forms of \"enmity\" and\n\"strife.\" Amongst ourselves very commonly the same limited contrast\nis implied. But to make \"temperance\" signify only or chiefly the\navoidance of strong drink is miserably to narrow its significance.\nIt covers the whole range of moral discipline, and concerns every\nsense and passion of our nature. Temperance is a practised mastery\nof self. It holds the reins of the chariot of life. It is the steady\nand prompt control of the outlooking sensibilities and appetencies,\nand inwardly moving desires. The tongue, the hand and foot, the\neye, the temper, the tastes and affections, all require in turn to\nfeel its curb. He is a temperate man, in the Apostle's meaning, who\n_holds himself well in hand_, who meets temptation as a disciplined\narmy meets the shock of battle, by skill and alertness and tempered\ncourage baffling the forces that outnumber it.\n\nThis also is a \"fruit of the Spirit\"--though we may count it the\nlowest and least, yet as indispensable to our salvation as the love\nof God itself. For the lack of this safeguard how many a saint has\nstumbled into folly and shame! It is no small thing for the Holy\nSpirit to accomplish in us, no mean prize for which we strive in\nseeking the crown of a perfect self-control. This mastery over the\nflesh is in truth the rightful prerogative of the human spirit, the\ndignity from which it fell through sin, and which the gift of the\nSpirit of Christ restores.\n\nAnd this virtue in a Christian man is exercised for the behoof of\nothers, as well as for his own. \"I keep my body under,\" cries the\nApostle, \"I make it my slave and not my master; lest, having preached\nto others, I myself should be a castaway\"--that is self-regard, mere\ncommon prudence; but again, \"It is good not to eat flesh, nor drink\nwine, nor to do anything whereby a brother is made to stumble or made\nweak\" (1 Cor. ix. 27; Rom. xiv. 21).\n\nTemperance is the guarded step, the sober, measured walk in which\nChristian goodness keeps the way of life, and makes straight paths\nfor stumbling and straying feet.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVI.\n\n_OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN._\n\n \"Brethren, even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which\n are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of meekness;\n looking to thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one\n another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if a\n man thinketh himself to be something, when he is nothing, he\n deceiveth himself. But let each man prove his own work, and then\n shall he have his glorying in regard of himself alone, and not\n of his neighbour. For each man shall bear his own burden.\"--GAL.\n vi. 1-5.\n\n\nThe division of the chapters at this point is almost as unfortunate\nas that between chaps. iv. and v. The introductory \"Brethren\" is not\na form of transition to a new topic; it calls in the brotherly love\nof the Galatians to put an end to the bickerings and recriminations\nwhich the Apostle has censured in the preceding verses. How unseemly\nfor _brethren_ to be \"vainglorious\" towards each other, to be\n\"provoking and envying one another!\" If they are spiritual men, they\nshould look more considerately on the faults of their neighbours,\nmore seriously on their own responsibilities.\n\nThe Galatic temperament, as we have seen, was prone to the\nmischievous vanity which the Apostle here reproves. Those who had,\nor fancied they had, some superiority over others in talent or in\ncharacter, prided themselves upon it. Even spiritual gifts were made\nmatter of ostentation; and display on the part of the more gifted\nexcited the jealousy of inferior brethren. The same disposition\nwhich manifests itself in arrogance on the one side, on the other\ntakes the form of discontent and envy. The heart-burnings and the\nsocial tension which this state of things creates, make every chance\ncollision a danger; and the slightest wound is inflamed into a\nrankling sore. The stumbling brother is pushed on into a fall; and\nthe fallen man, who might have been helped to his feet, is left to\nlie there, the object of unpitying reproach. Indeed, the lapse of\nhis neighbour is to the vainglorious man a cause of satisfaction\nrather than of sorrow. The other's weakness serves for a foil to\nhis strength. Instead of stooping down to \"restore such a one,\" he\nholds stiffly aloof in the eminence of conscious virtue; and bears\nhimself more proudly in the lustre added to his piety by his fellow's\ndisgrace. \"God, I thank Thee,\" he seems to say, \"that I am not as\nother men,--nor even as this wretched backslider!\" The compellation\n\"Brethren\" is itself a rebuke to such heartless pride.\n\nThere are two reflections which should instantly correct the spirit\nof vain-glory. The Apostle appeals in the first place to _brotherly\nlove_, to the claims that an erring fellow-Christian has upon our\nsympathy, to the meekness and forbearance which the Spirit of\ngrace inspires, in fine to Christ's law which makes compassion our\nduty. At the same time he points out to us _our own infirmity_ and\nexposure to temptation. He reminds us of the weight of our individual\nresponsibility and the final account awaiting us. A proper sense at\nonce of the rights of others and of our own obligations will make\nthis shallow vanity impossible.\n\nThis double-edged exhortation takes shape in two leading sentences,\nsharply clashing with each other in the style of paradox in which the\nApostle loves to contrast the opposite sides of truth: \"Bear ye one\nanother's burdens\" (ver. 2); and yet \"Every man shall bear his own\nburden\" (ver. 5).\n\nI. What then are the considerations that commend _the burdens of\nothers_ for our bearing?\n\nThe burden the Apostle has in view is that of _a brother's trespass_:\n\"Brethren, if a man be overtaken in some trespass.\"\n\nHere the question arises as to whether Paul means _overtaken by the\ntemptation_, or _by the discovery of his sin_--surprised _into_\ncommitting, or _in_ committing the trespass. Winer, Lightfoot,\nand some other interpreters, read the words in the latter sense:\n\"_surprised_, _detected_ in the act of committing any sin, so that\nhis guilt is placed beyond a doubt\" (Lightfoot). We are persuaded,\nnotwithstanding, that the common view of the text is the correct\none. The manner of the offender's detection has little to do with\nthe way in which he should be treated; but the circumstances of his\nfall have everything to do with it. The suddenness, the surprise of\nhis temptation is both a reason for more lenient judgment, and a\nground for hope of his restoration. The preposition \"in\" (\u03ad\u03bd), it\nis urged, stands in the way of this interpretation. We might have\nexpected to read \"(surprised) _by_,\" or perhaps \"_into_ (any sin).\"\nBut the word is \"trespass,\" not \"sin.\" It points not to the cause of\nthe man's fall, but to _the condition in which it has placed him_.\nThe Greek preposition (according to a well known idiom of verbs of\n_motion_)[143] indicates the result of the unexpected assault to\nwhich the man has been subject. A gust of temptation has caught him\nunawares; and we now see him lying overthrown and prostrate, involved\n\"in some trespass.\"\n\n [143] For this pregnant force of \u03ad\u03bd see the grammarians:\n Moulton's _Winer_, pp. 514, 5; _A. Buttmann_, pp. 328, 9. (Eng.\n Ver.).\n\nThe Apostle is supposing an instance--possibly an actual case--in\nwhich the sin committed was due to weakness and surprise, rather\nthan deliberate intention; like that of Eve, when \"the woman being\nbeguiled fell into transgression.\"[144] Such a fall deserves\ncommiseration. The attack was unlooked for; the man was off his\nguard. The Gallic nature is heedless and impulsive. Men of this\ntemperament should make allowance for each other. An offence\ncommitted in a rash moment, under provocation, must not be visited\nwith implacable severity, nor magnified until it become a fatal\nbarrier between the evil-doer and society. And Paul says expressly,\n\"If _a man_ be overtaken\"--a delicate reminder of our human infirmity\nand common danger (comp. 1 Cor. x. 13). Let us remember that it is a\nman who has erred, of like passions with ourselves; and his trespass\nwill excite pity for him, and apprehension for ourselves.\n\n [144] 1 Tim. ii. 14: the expression is parallel in point of\n grammar, as well as sense; \u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd \u03ad\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9.\n\nSuch an effect the occurrence should have upon \"the spiritual,\" on\nthe men of love and peace, who \"walk in the Spirit.\" The Apostle's\nappeal is qualified by this definition. Vain and self-seeking men,\nthe irritable, the resentful, are otherwise affected by a neighbour's\ntrespass. They will be angry with him, lavish in virtuous scorn;\nbut it is not in them to \"restore such a one.\" They are more likely\nto aggravate than heal the wound, to push the weak man down when he\ntries to rise, than to help him to his feet. The work of restoration\nneeds a knowledge of the human heart, a self-restraint and patient\nskill, quite beyond their capability.\n\nThe _restoration_ here signified, denotes not only, or not so much,\nthe man's inward, spiritual renewal, as his recovery for the Church,\nthe mending of the rent caused by his removal. In 1 Cor. i. 10; 2\nCor. xiii. 11; 1 Thess. iii. 10, where, as in other places, the\nEnglish verb \"perfect\" enters into the rendering of \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, it\ngives the idea of re-adjustment, the right fitting of part to part,\nmember to member, in some larger whole. Writing to the Corinthian\nChurch at this time respecting a flagrant trespass committed there,\nfor which the transgressor was now penitent, the Apostle bids its\nmembers \"confirm their love\" to him (2 Cor. ii. 5-11). So here \"the\nspiritual\" amongst the Galatians are urged to make it their business\nto _set right_ the lapsed brother, to bring him back as soon and\nsafely as might be to the fold of Christ.\n\nOf all the fruits of the Spirit, _meekness_ is most required\nfor this office of restoration, the meekness of Christ the Good\nShepherd--of Paul who was \"gentle as a nurse\" amongst his children,\nand even against the worst offenders preferred to \"come in love and\na spirit of meekness,\" rather than \"with a rod\" (1 Thess. ii. 7; 1\nCor. iv. 21). To reprove without pride or acrimony, to stoop to the\nfallen without the air of condescension, requires the \"spirit of\nmeekness\" in a singular degree. Such a bearing lends peculiar grace\nto compassion. This \"gentleness of Christ\" is one of the finest\nand rarest marks of the spiritual man. The moroseness sometimes\nassociated with religious zeal, the disposition to judge hardly the\nfailings of weaker men is anything but according to Christ. It is\nwritten of Him, \"A bruised reed shall He not break, and the smoking\nflax shall He not quench\" (Isa. xlii. 3; Matt xii. 20).\n\nMeekness becomes sinful men dealing with fellow-sinners. \"Considering\n_thyself_,\" says the Apostle, \"lest thou also be tempted.\" It is a\nnoticeable thing that men morally weak in any given direction are\napt to be the severest judges of those who err in the same respect,\njust as people who have risen out of poverty are often the harshest\ntowards the poor. They wish to forget their own past, and hate to\nbe reminded of a condition from which they have suffered. Or is the\njudge, in sentencing a kindred offender, seeking to reinforce his\nown conscience and to give a warning to himself? One is inclined\nsometimes to think so. But reflection on our own infirmities should\ncounteract, instead of fostering censoriousness. Every man knows\nenough of himself to make him chary of denouncing others. \"Look to\n_thyself_,\" cries the Apostle. \"Thou hast considered thy brother's\nfaults. Now turn thine eye inward, and contemplate thine own. Hast\nthou never aforetime committed the offence with which he stands\ncharged; or haply yielded to the like temptation in a less degree? Or\nif not even that, it may be thou art guilty of sins of another kind,\nthough hidden from human sight, in the eyes of God no less heinous.\"\n\"Judge not,\" said the Judge of all the earth, \"lest ye be judged.\nWith what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you\" (Matt. vii.\n1-5).\n\nThis exhortation begins in general terms; but in the latter clause\nof ver. 1 it passes into the individualising singular--\"looking to\n_thyself_, lest even _thou_ be tempted.\" The disaster befalling\none reveals the common peril; it is a signal for every member of\nthe Church to take heed to himself. The scrutiny which it calls\nfor belongs to each man's private conscience. And the faithfulness\nand integrity required in those who approach the wrongdoer with a\nview to his recovery, must be chastened by personal solicitude. The\nfall of a Christian brother should be in any case the occasion of\nheart-searching, and profound humiliation. Feelings of indifference\ntowards him, much more of contempt, will prove the prelude of a worse\noverthrow for ourselves.\n\nThe burden of a brother's trespass is the most painful that can\ndevolve upon a Christian man. But this is not the only burden we\nbring upon each other. There are burdens of anxiety and sorrow, of\npersonal infirmity, of family difficulty, of business embarrassment,\ninfinite varieties and complications of trial in which the resources\nof brotherly sympathy are taxed. The injunction of the Apostle has\nan unlimited range. That which burdens my friend and brother cannot\nbe otherwise than a solicitude to me. Whatever it be that cripples\nhim and hinders his running the race set before him, I am bound,\naccording to the best of my judgement and ability, to assist him to\novercome it. If I leave him to stagger on alone, to sink under his\nload when my shoulder might have eased it for him, the reproach will\nbe mine.\n\nThis is no work of supererogation, no matter of mere liking and\nchoice. I am not at liberty to refuse to share the burdens of the\nbrotherhood. \"Bear ye one another's burdens,\" Paul says, \"and so\nfulfil _the law of Christ_.\" This law the Apostle has already cited\nand enforced against the contentions and jealousies rife in Galatia\n(ch. v. 14, 15). But it has a further application. Christ's law of\nlove not only says, \"Thou shalt not bite and devour; thou shalt not\nprovoke and envy thy brother;\" but also, \"Thou shalt help and comfort\nhim, and regard his burden as thine own.\"\n\nThis law makes of the Church one body, with a solidarity of interests\nand obligations. It finds employment and discipline for the energy of\nChristian freedom, in yoking it to the service of the over-burdened.\nIt reveals the dignity and privilege of moral strength, which consist\nnot in the enjoyment of its own superiority, but in its power to bear\n\"the infirmities of the weak.\" This was the glory of Christ, who\n\"pleased not Himself\" (Rom. xv. 1-4). The Giver of the law is its\ngreat Example. \"Being in the form of God,\" He \"took the form of a\nservant,\" that in love He might serve mankind; He \"became obedient,\nunto the death of the cross\" (Phil. ii. 1-8). Justly is the inference\ndrawn, \"We also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren\" (1\nJohn iii. 16). There is no limit to the service which the redeemed\nbrotherhood of Christ may expect from its members.\n\nOnly this law must not be abused by the indolent and the\noverreaching, by the men who are ready to throw their burdens\non others and make every generous neighbour the victim of their\ndishonesty. It is the need not the demand of our brother which\nclaims our help. We are bound to take care that it is his necessity\nto which we minister, not his imposture or his slothfulness. The\nwarning that \"each man shall bear his own burden\" is addressed to\nthose who _receive_, as well as to those who render aid in the common\nburden-bearing of the Church.\n\nII. The adjustment of social and individual duty is often far from\neasy, and requires the nicest discernment and moral tact. Both\nare brought into view in this paragraph, in its latter as well as\nin its former section. But in vv. 1, 2 the need of others, in vv.\n3-5 our personal responsibility forms the leading consideration. We\nsee on the one hand, that a true self-regard teaches us to identify\nourselves with the moral interests of others: while, on the other\nhand, a false regard to others is excluded (ver. 4) which disturbs\nthe judgement to be formed respecting ourselves. The thought of _his\nown burden_ to be borne by each man now comes to the front of the\nexhortation.\n\nVer. 3 stands between the two counterpoised estimates. It is another\nshaft directed against Galatian vain-glory, and pointed with Paul's\nkeenest irony. \"For if a man thinketh he is something, being nothing\nhe deceiveth himself.\"\n\nThis truth is very evident. But what is its bearing on the matter\nin hand? The maxim is advanced to support the foregoing admonition.\nIt was their self-conceit that led some of the Apostle's readers\nto treat with contempt the brother who had trespassed; he tells\nthem that this opinion of theirs is a _delusion_, a kind of mental\nhallucination (\u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1fb7 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd). It betrays a melancholy ignorance.\nThe \"spiritual\" man who \"thinks himself to be something,\" says to\nyou, \"I am quite above these weak brethren, as you see. Their habits\nof life, their temptations are not mine. Their sympathy would be\nuseless to me. And I shall not burden myself with their feebleness,\nnor vex myself with their ignorance and rudeness.\" If any man\nseparates himself from the Christian commonalty and breaks the ties\nof religious fellowship on grounds of this sort, and yet imagines\nhe is following Christ, he \"deceives himself.\" Others will see how\nlittle his affected eminence is worth. Some will humour his vanity;\nmany will ridicule or pity it; few will be deceived by it.\n\nThe fact of a man's \"thinking himself to be something\" goes far to\nprove that he \"is nothing.\" \"Woe unto them that are wise in their\nown eyes, and prudent in their own sight.\" Real knowledge is humble;\nit knows its nothingness. Socrates, when the oracle pronounced him\nthe wisest man in Greece, at last discovered that the response was\nright, inasmuch as he alone was aware that he knew nothing, while\nother men were confident of their knowledge. And a greater than\nSocrates, our All-wise, All-holy Saviour, says to us, \"Learn of Me,\nfor I am meek and lowly in heart.\" It is in humility and dependence,\nin self-forgetting that true wisdom begins. Who are we, although\nthe most refined or highest in place, that we should despise plain,\nuncultured members of the Church, those who bear life's heavier\nburdens and amongst whom our Saviour spent His days on earth, and\ntreat them as unfit for our company, unworthy of fellowship with us\nin Christ?\n\nThey are themselves the greatest losers who neglect to fulfil\nChrist's law. Such men might learn from their humbler brethren,\naccustomed to the trials and temptations of a working life and a\nrough world, how to bear more worthily their own burdens. How foolish\nof \"the eye to say to the hand\" or \"foot, I have no need of thee!\"\n\"God hath chosen the poor of this world rich in faith.\" There are\ntruths of which they are our best teachers--priceless lessons of the\npower of Divine grace and the deep things of Christian experience.\nThis isolation robs the poorer members of the Church in their turn\nof the manifold help due to them from communion with those more\nhappily circumstanced. How many of the evils around us would be\nameliorated, how many of our difficulties would vanish, if we could\nbring about a truer Christian fraternisation, if caste-feeling in\nour English Church-life were once destroyed, if men would lay aside\ntheir stiffness and social _hauteur_, and cease to think that they\n\"are something\" on grounds of worldly distinction and wealth which in\nChrist are absolutely nothing.\n\nThe vain conceit of their superiority indulged in by some of his\nreaders, the Apostle further corrects by reminding the self-deceivers\nof _their own responsibility_. The irony of ver. 3 passes into a\nsterner tone of warning in vv. 4 and 5. \"Let each man try his own\nwork,\" he cries. \"Judge yourselves, instead of judging one another.\nMind your own duty, rather than your neighbours' faults. Do not think\nof your worth or talents in comparison with theirs; but see to it\nthat your _work_ is right.\" The question for each of us is not, What\ndo others fail to do? but, What am I myself really doing? What will\nmy life's work amount to, when measured by that which God expects\nfrom me?\n\nThis question shuts each man up within his own conscience. It\nanticipates the final judgement-day. \"Every one of us must give\naccount of _himself_ to God\" (Rom. xiv. 12). Reference to the conduct\nof others is here out of place. The petty comparisons which feed our\nvanity and our class-prejudices are of no avail at the bar of God.\nI may be able for every fault of my own to find some one else more\nfaulty. But this makes _me_ no whit better. It is the intrinsic,\nnot the comparative worth of character and daily work of which God\ntakes account. If we study our brother's work, it should be with a\nview to enable him to do it better, or to learn to improve our own\nby his example; not in order to find excuses for ourselves in his\nshortcomings.\n\n\"And then\"--if our work abide the test--\"we shall have our glorying\nin ourselves alone, not in regard to our neighbour.\" Not his flaws\nand failures, but my own honest work will be the ground of my\nsatisfaction. This was Paul's \"glorying\" in face of the slanders\nby which he was incessantly pursued. It lay in the testimony of\nhis conscience. He lived under the severest self-scrutiny. He knew\nhimself as the man only can who \"knows the fear of the Lord,\" who\nplaces himself every day before the dread tribunal of Christ Jesus.\nHe is \"made manifest unto God;\" and in the light of that searching\nPresence he can affirm that he \"knows nothing against himself.\"[145]\nBut this boast makes him humble. \"_By the grace of God_\" he is\nenabled to \"have his conversation in the world in holiness and\nsincerity coming of God.\" If he had seemed to claim any credit for\nhimself, he at once corrects the thought: \"Yet not I,\" he says, \"but\nGod's grace that was with me. I have my glorying in Christ Jesus in\nthe things pertaining to God, in that which Christ hath wrought in\nme\" (1 Cor. xv. 10; Rom. xv. 16-19).\n\n [145] 1 Cor. iv. 1-5; 2 Cor. i. 12; v. 10-12.\n\nSo that this boast of the Apostle, in which he invites the\nvainglorious Galatians to secure a share, resolves itself after all\ninto his one boast, \"in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ\" (ver.\n14). If his work on trial should prove to be gold, \"abiding\" amongst\nthe world's imperishable treasures and fixed foundations of truth\n(1 Cor. iii. 10-15), Christ only was to be praised for this. Paul's\nglorying is the opposite of the Legalist's, who presumes on his\n\"works\" as his own achievements, commending him for righteous before\nGod. \"Justified by works,\" such a man hath \"whereof to glory, but\nnot toward God\" (Rom. iv. 2). His boasting redounds to himself.\nWhatever glory belongs to the work of the Christian must be referred\nto God. Such work furnishes no ground for magnifying the man at the\nexpense of his fellows. If we praise the stream, it is to commend\nthe fountain. If we admire the lives of the saints and celebrate the\ndeeds of the heroes of faith, it is _ad majorem Dei gloriam_--\"that\nin all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ\" (1 Pet. iv.\n11).\n\n\"For each will bear his own load.\" Here is the ultimate reason\nfor the self-examination to which the Apostle has been urging his\nreaders, in order to restrain their vanity. The emphatic repetition\nof the words _each man_ in vv. 4 and 5 brings out impressively the\npersonal character of the account to be rendered. At the same time,\nthe deeper sense of our own burdens thus awakened will help to stir\nin us sympathy for the loads under which our fellows labour. So that\nthis warning indirectly furthers the appeal for sympathy with which\nthe chapter began.\n\nFaithful scrutiny of our work may give us reasons for satisfaction\nand gratitude towards God. But it will yield matter of another kind.\nIt will call to remembrance old sins and follies, lost opportunities,\nwasted powers, with their burden of regret and humiliation. It will\nset before us the array of our obligations, the manifold tasks\ncommitted to us by our heavenly Master, compelling us to say, \"Who\nis sufficient for these things?\" And beside the reproofs of the past\nand the stern demands of the present, there sounds in the soul's\near the message of the future, the summons to our final reckoning.\nEach of us has his own life-load, made up of this triple burden.\nA thousand varying circumstances and individual experiences go to\nconstitute the ever-growing load which we bear with us from youth\nto age, like the wayfarer his bundle, like the soldier his knapsack\nand accoutrements--the individual lot, the peculiar untransferable\nvocation and responsibility fastened by the hand of God upon our\nshoulders. This burden we shall have to carry up to Christ's\njudgement-seat. He is our Master; He alone can give us our discharge.\nHis lips must pronounce the final \"Well done\"--or, \"Thou wicked and\nslothful servant!\"\n\nIn this sentence the Apostle employs a different word from that used\nin ver. 2. There he was thinking of the weight, the _burdensomeness_\nof our brother's troubles, which we haply may lighten for him,\nand which is so far common property. But the second word, \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\n(applied for instance to _a ship's lading_), indicates _that which\nis proper to each_ in the burdens of life. There are duties that\nwe have no power to devolve, cares and griefs that we must bear in\nsecret, problems that we must work out severally and for ourselves.\nTo consider them aright, to weigh well the sum of our duty will dash\nour self-complacency; it will surely make us serious and humble.\nLet us wake up from dreams of self-pleasing to an earnest, manly\napprehension of life's demands--\"while,\" like the Apostle, \"we look\nnot at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not\nseen and eternal\" (2 Cor. iv. 18).\n\n * * * * *\n\nAfter all, it is the men who have the highest standard for themselves\nthat as a rule are most considerate in their estimate of others. The\nholiest are the most pitiful. They know best how to enter into the\nstruggles of a weaker brother. They can appreciate his unsuccessful\nresistance to temptation; they can discern where and how he has\nfailed, and how much of genuine sorrow there is in his remorse. From\nthe fulness of their own experience they can interpret a possibility\nof better things in what excites contempt in those who judge by\nappearance and by conventional rules. He who has learned faithfully\nto \"consider himself\" and meekly to \"bear his own burden,\" is most\nfit to do the work of Christ, and to shepherd His tempted and\nstraying sheep. Strict with ourselves, we shall grow wise and gentle\nin our care for others.\n\nIn the Christian conscience the sense of personal and that of social\nresponsibility serve each to stimulate and guard the other. Duty and\nsympathy, love and law are fused into one. For Christ is all in all;\nand these two hemispheres of life unite in Him.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVII.\n\n_SOWING AND REAPING._\n\n \"But let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him\n that teacheth in all good things. Be not deceived; God is not\n mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.\n For he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap\n corruption; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the\n Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not be weary in well-doing:\n for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. So then, as\n we have opportunity, let us work that which is good toward all\n men, and especially toward them that are of the household of the\n faith\"--GAL. vi. 6-10.\n\n\n_Each shall bear his own burden_ (ver. 5)--_but let there be\ncommunion of disciple with teacher in all that is good_. The latter\nsentence is clearly intended to balance the former. The transition\nturns upon the same antithesis between social and individual\nresponsibility that occupied us in the foregoing Chapter. But it is\nnow presented on another side. In the previous passage it concerned\nthe conduct of \"the spiritual\" toward erring brethren whom they were\ntempted to despise; here, their behaviour toward teachers whom they\nwere disposed to neglect. There it is inferiors, here superiors that\nare in view. The Galatian \"vain-glory\" manifested itself alike in\nprovocation toward the former, and in envy toward the latter (ch. v.\n26). In both ways it bred disaffection, and threatened to break up\nthe Church's unity. The two effects are perfectly consistent. Those\nwho are harsh in their dealings with the weak, are commonly rude\nand insubordinate toward their betters, where they dare to be so.\nSelf-conceit and self-sufficiency engender in the one direction a\ncold contempt, in the other a jealous independence. The former error\nis corrected by a due sense of our own infirmities; the latter by the\nconsideration of our responsibility to God. We are compelled to feel\nfor the burdens of others when we realise the weight of our own. We\nlearn to respect the claims of those placed over us, when we remember\nwhat we owe to God through them. Personal responsibility is the last\nword of the former paragraph; social responsibility is the first word\nof this. Such is the contrast marked by the transitional _But_.\n\nFrom this point of view ver. 6 gains a very comprehensive sense. \"All\ngood things\" cannot surely be limited to the \"carnal things\" of 1\nCor. ix. 11. As Meyer and Beet amongst recent commentators clearly\nshow, the context gives to this phrase a larger scope. At the same\ntime, there is no necessity to exclude the thought of temporal good.\nThe Apostle designedly makes his appeal as wide as possible. The\nreasoning of the corresponding passage in the Corinthian letter is a\ndeduction from the general principle laid down here.\n\nBut it is _spiritual fellowship_ that the Apostle chiefly\ndesiderates. The true minister of Christ counts this vastly more\nsacred, and has this interest far more at heart than his own\ntemporalities. He labours for the unity of the Church; he strives\nto secure the mutual sympathy and co-operation of all orders and\nranks-- teachers and taught, officers and private members--\"in every\ngood word and work.\" He must have the heart of his people with him\nin his work, or his joy will be faint and his success scant indeed.\nChristian teaching is designed to awaken this sympathetic response.\nAnd it will take expression in the rendering of whatever kind of help\nthe gifts and means of the hearer and the needs of the occasion call\nfor. Paul requires every member of the Body of Christ to make her\nwants and toils his own. We have no right to leave the burdens of\nthe Church's work to her leaders, to expect her battles to be fought\nand won by the officers alone. This neglect has been the parent of\ninnumerable mischiefs. Indolence in the laity fosters sacerdotalism\nin the clergy. But when, on the contrary, an active, sympathetic\nunion is maintained between \"him that is taught\" and \"him that\nteacheth,\" that other matter of the temporal support of the Christian\nministry, to which this text is so often exclusively referred,\ncomes in as a necessary detail, to be generously and prudently\narranged, but which will not be felt on either side as a burden or\na difficulty. Everything depends on the fellowship of spirit, on\nthe strength of the bond of love that knits together the members of\nthe Body of Christ. Here, in Galatia, that bond had been grievously\nweakened. In a Church so disturbed, the fellowship of teachers and\ntaught was inevitably strained.\n\nSuch communion the Apostle craves from his children in the faith with\nan intense yearning. This is the one fruit of God's grace in them\nwhich he covets to reap for himself, and feels he has a right to\nexpect. \"Be ye as I am,\" he cries--\"do not desert me, my children,\nfor whom I travail in birth. Let me not have to toil for you in vain\"\n(ch. iv. 12-19). So again, writing to the Corinthians: \"It was _I_\nthat begat you in Christ Jesus; I beseech you then, be followers of\nme. Let me remind you of my ways in the Lord.... O ye Corinthians,\nto you our mouth is open, our heart enlarged. Pay me back in kind\n(you are my children), and be ye too enlarged\" (1 Cor. iv. 14-17;\n2 Cor. vi. 11-13). He \"thanks God\" for the Philippians \"on every\nremembrance of them,\" and \"makes his supplication\" for them \"with\njoy, because of their fellowship in regard to the gospel from the\nfirst day until now\" (Phil. i. 3-7). Such is the fellowship which\nPaul wished to see restored in the Galatian Churches.\n\nIn ver. 10 he extends his appeal to embrace in it all the kindly\noffices of life. For the love inspired by the Church, the service\nrendered to her, should quicken all our human sympathies and\nmake us readier to meet every claim of pity or affection. While\nour sympathies, like those of a loving family, will be concerned\n\"especially\" with \"the household of faith,\" and within that circle\nmore especially with our pastors and teachers in Christ, they have\nno limit but that of \"opportunity;\" they should \"work that which is\ngood toward all men.\" True zeal for the Church widens instead of\nnarrowing, our charities. Household affection is the nursery, not the\nrival, of love to our fatherland and to humanity.\n\nNow the Apostle is extremely urgent in this matter of communion\nbetween teachers and taught. It concerns the very life of the\nChristian community. The welfare of the Church and the progress of\nthe kingdom of God depend on the degree to which its individual\nmembers accept their responsibility in its affairs. Ill-will towards\nChristian teachers is paralyzing in its effects on the Church's\nlife. Greatly are _they_ to blame, if their conduct gives rise to\ndiscontent. Only less severe is the condemnation of those in lower\nplace who harbour in themselves and foster in the minds of others\nsentiments of disloyalty. To cherish this mistrust, to withhold\nour sympathy from him who serves us in spiritual things, this, the\nApostle declares, is not merely a wrong done to the man, it is\nan affront to God Himself. If it be God's Word that His servant\nteaches, then God expects some fitting return to be made for the\ngift He has bestowed. Of that return the pecuniary contribution, the\nmeed of \"carnal things\" with which so many seem to think their debt\ndischarged, is often the least and easiest part. How far have men a\nright to be hearers--profited and believing hearers--in the Christian\ncongregation, and yet decline the duties of Church fellowship? They\neat the Church's bread, but will not do her work. They expect like\nchildren to be fed and nursed and waited on; they think that if they\n_pay_ their minister tolerably well, they have \"communicated with\"\nhim quite sufficiently. This apathy has much the same effect as the\nGalatian bickerings and jealousies. It robs the Church of the help\nof the children whom she has nourished and brought up. Those who act\nthus are trying in reality to \"mock God.\" They expect _Him_ to sow\nhis bounties upon them, but will not let Him reap. They refuse Him\nthe return that He most requires for His choicest benefits.\n\nNow, the Apostle says, God is not to be defrauded in this way. Men\nmay wrong each other; they may grieve and affront His ministers.\nBut no man is clever enough to cheat God. It is not Him, it is\n_themselves_ they will prove to have deceived. Vain and selfish men\nwho take the best that God and man can do for them as though it were\na tribute to their greatness, envious and restless men who break the\nChurch's fellowship of peace, will reap at last even as they sow.\nThe mischief and the loss may fall on others now; but in its full\nripeness it will come in the end upon themselves. The final reckoning\nawaits us in another world. And as we act by God and by His Church\nnow, in our day, so He will act hereafter by us in His day.\n\nThus the Apostle, in vv. 6 and 7, places this matter in the searching\nlight of eternity. He brings to bear upon it one of the great\nspiritual maxims characteristic of his teaching. Paul's unique\ninfluence as a religious teacher lies in his mastery of principles\nof this kind, in the keenness of insight and the incomparable vigour\nwith which he applies eternal truths to commonplace occurrences. The\npaltriness and vulgarity of these local broils and disaffections lend\nto his warning a more severe impressiveness. With what a startling\nand sobering force, one thinks, the rebuke of these verses must have\nfallen on the ears of the wrangling Galatians! How unspeakably mean\ntheir quarrels appear in the light of the solemn issues opening out\nbefore them! It was _God_ whom their folly had presumed to mock.\nIt was the harvest of eternal life of which their factiousness\nthreatened to defraud them.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe principle on which this warning rests is stated in terms that\ngive it universal application: _Whatsoever a man soweth, that\nshall he also reap_. This is in fact the postulate of all moral\nresponsibility. It asserts the continuity of personal existence,\nthe connection of cause and effect in human character. It makes man\nthe master of his own destiny. It declares that his future doom\nhangs upon his present choice, and is in truth its evolution and\nconsummation. The twofold lot of \"corruption\" or \"life eternal\" is\nin every case no more, and no less, than the proper harvest of the\nkind of sowing practised here and now. The use made of our seed-time\ndetermines exactly, and with a moral certainty greater even than\nthat which rules in the natural field, what kind of fruitage our\nimmortality will render.\n\nThis great axiom deserves to be looked at in its broadest aspect. It\ninvolves the following considerations:--\n\nI. _Our present life is the seed-time of an eternal harvest._\n\nEach recurring year presents a mirror of human existence. The analogy\nis a commonplace of the world's poetry. The spring is in every land a\npicture of youth--its morning freshness and innocence, its laughing\nsunshine, its opening blossoms, its bright and buoyant energy; and,\nalas, oftentimes its cold winds and nipping frosts and early, sudden\nblight! Summer images a vigorous manhood, with all the powers in\naction and the pulses of life beating at full swing; when the dreams\nof youth are worked out in sober, waking earnest; when manly strength\nis tested and matured under the heat of mid-day toil, and character\nis disciplined, and success or failure in life's battle must be\ndetermined. Then follows mellow autumn, season of shortening days and\nslackening steps and gathering snows; season too of ripe experience,\nof chastened thought and feeling, of widened influence and clustering\nhonours. And the story ends in the silence and winter of the grave!\n_Ends?_ Nay, that is a new beginning! This whole round of earthly\nvicissitude is but a single spring-time. It is the mere childhood of\nman's existence, the threshold of the vast house of life.\n\nThe oldest and wisest man amongst us is only a little child in the\nreckoning of eternity. The Apostle Paul counted himself no more. \"We\nknow in part,\" he says; \"we prophesy in part--talking, reasoning\nlike children. We shall become _men_, seeing face to face, knowing\nas we are known\" (1 Cor. xiii. 8, 11, 12). Do we not ourselves feel\nthis in our higher moods? There is an instinct of immortality, a\nforecasting of some ampler existence, \"a stirring of blind life\"\nwithin the soul; there are visionary gleams of an unearthly Paradise\nhaunting at times the busiest and most unimaginative men. We are\nintelligences in the germ, lying folded up in the chrysalis stage\nof our existence. Eyes, wings are still to come. \"It doth not yet\nappear what we shall be,\" no more than he who had seen but the\nseed-sowing of early spring and the bare wintry furrows, could\nimagine what the golden, waving harvest would be like. There is\na glorious, everlasting kingdom of heaven, a world which in its\nduration, its range of action and experience, its style of equipment\nand occupation, will be worthy of the elect children of God. Worship,\nmusic, the purest passages of human affection and of moral elevation,\nmay give us some foretaste of its joys. But what it will be really\nlike, \"Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard; nor heart of man conceived.\"\n\nThink of that, struggling heart, worn with labour, broken by sorrow,\ncramped and thwarted by the pressure of an unkindly world. \"The\nearnest expectancy of the creation\" waits for your revealing (Rom.\nviii. 19). You will have your enfranchisement; your soul will take\nwing at last. Only have faith in God, and in righteousness; only \"be\nnot weary in well-doing.\" Those crippled powers will get their full\nplay. Those baffled purposes and frustrated affections will unfold\nand blossom into a completeness undreamed of now, in the sunshine\nof heaven, in \"the liberty of the glory of the sons of God.\" Why\nlook for your harvest here! It is _March_, not August yet. \"_In due\nseason_ we shall reap, if we faint not.\" See to it that you \"sow\nto the Spirit,\" that your life be of the true seed of the kingdom;\nand for the rest, have no care nor fear. What should we think of the\nfarmer who in winter, when his fields were frost-bound, should go\nabout wringing his hands and crying that his labour was all lost! Are\nwe wiser in our despondent moods? However dreary and unpromising,\nhowever poor and paltry in its outward seeming the earthly seed-time,\nyour life's work will have its resurrection. Heaven lies hidden in\nthose daily acts of humble, difficult duty, even as the giant oak\nwith its centuries of growth and all its summer glory sleeps in the\nacorn-cup. No eye may see it now; but \"the Day will declare it!\"\n\nII. In the second place, _the quality of the future harvest depends\nentirely on the present sowing_.\n\nIn _quantity_, as we have seen, in outward state and circumstance,\nthere is a complete contrast. The harvest surpasses the seed from\nwhich it sprang, by thirty, sixty or a hundred-fold. But in _quality_\nwe find a strict agreement. In degree they may differ infinitely;\nin kind they are one. The harvest multiplies the effect of the\nsower's labour; but it multiplies exactly that effect, and nothing\nelse. This law runs through all life. If we could not count upon it,\nlabour would be purposeless and useless; we should have to yield\nourselves passively to nature's caprice. The farmer sows wheat in his\ncornfield, the gardener plants and trains his fig-tree; and he gets\nwheat, or figs, for his reward--nothing else. Or is he a \"sluggard\"\nthat \"will not plow by reason of the cold?\" Does he let weeds and\nthistledown have the run of his garden-plot? Then it yields him a\nplentiful harvest of thistles and of weeds! What could he expect?\n\"Men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles.\" From\nthe highest to the lowest order of living things, each grows and\nfructifies \"after its kind.\" This is the rule of nature, the law\nwhich constituted _Nature_ at the beginning. The good tree brings\nforth good fruit; and the good seed makes the good tree.\n\nAll this has its moral counterpart. The law of reproduction in\nkind holds equally true of the relation of this life to the next.\nEternity for us will be the multiplied, consummated outcome of the\ngood or evil of the present life. Hell is just sin ripe--rotten ripe.\nHeaven is the fruitage of righteousness. There will be two kinds\nof reaping, the Apostle tells us, because there are two different\nkinds of sowing. \"He that soweth to his flesh, shall of the flesh\nreap corruption:\" there is nothing arbitrary or surprising in that.\n\"Corruption\"--the moral decay and dissolution of the man's being--is\nthe natural retributive effect of his carnality. And \"he that soweth\nto the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.\" Here,\ntoo, the sequence is inevitable. Like breeds its like. Life springs\nof life; and death eternal is the culmination of the soul's present\ndeath to God and goodness. The future glory of the saints is at\nonce a Divine reward, and a necessary development of their present\nfaithfulness. And eternal life lies germinally contained in faith's\nearliest beginning, when it is but as \"a grain of mustard seed.\" We\nmay expect in our final state the outcome of our present conduct, as\ncertainly as the farmer who puts wheat into his furrows in November\nwill count on getting wheat out of them again next August.\n\nUnder this law of the harvest we are living at this moment, and\nsowing every day the seed of an immortality of honour or of shame.\nLife is the seed-plot of eternity; and _youth is above all the\nseed-time of life_. What are our children doing with these precious,\nvernal years? What is going into their minds? What ideas, what\ndesires are rooting themselves in these young souls? If it be pure\nthoughts and true affections, love to God, self-denial, patience\nand humility, courage to do what is right--if these be the things\nthat are sown in their hearts, there will be for them, and for us, a\nglorious harvest of wisdom and love and honour in the years to come,\nand in the day of eternity. But if sloth and deceit be there, and\nunholy thoughts, vanity and envy and self-indulgence, theirs will be\na bitter harvesting. Men talk of \"sowing their wild oats,\" as though\nthat were an end of it; as though a wild and prodigal youth might\nnone the less be followed by a sober manhood and an honoured old\nage. But it is not so. If wild oats have been sown, there will be\nwild oats to reap, as certainly as autumn follows spring. For every\ntime the youth deceives parent or teacher, let him know that he will\nbe deceived by the Father of lies a hundred times. For every impure\nthought or dishonourable word, shame will come upon him sixty-fold.\nIf his mind be filled with trash and refuse, then trash and refuse\nare all it will be able to produce. If the good seed be not timely\nsown in his heart, thorns and nettles will sow themselves there fast\nenough; and his soul will become like the sluggard's garden, rank\nwith base weeds and poison-plants, a place where all vile things will\nhave their resort,--\"rejected and nigh unto a curse.\"\n\nWho is \"he that soweth to his own flesh?\" It is, in a word, the\n_selfish_ man. He makes his personal interest, and as a rule his\nbodily pleasure, directly or ultimately, the object of life. The\nsense of responsibility to God, the thought of life as a stewardship\nof which one must give account, have no place in his mind. He is a\n\"lover of pleasure rather than a lover of God.\" His desires, unfixed\non God, steadily tend downwards. Idolatry of self becomes slavery to\nthe flesh. Every act of selfish pleasure-seeking, untouched by nobler\naims, weakens and worsens the soul's life. The selfish man gravitates\ndownward into the sensual man; the sensual man downward into the\nbottomless pit.\n\nThis is the \"minding of the flesh\" which \"is death\" (Rom. viii.\n5-8, 13). For it is \"enmity against God\" and defiance of His law.\nIt overthrows the course of nature, the balance of our human\nconstitution; it brings disease into the frame of our being. The\nflesh, unsubdued and uncleansed by the virtue of the Spirit, breeds\n\"corruption.\" Its predominance is the sure presage of death. The\nprocess of decay begins already, this side the grave; and it is\noften made visible by appalling signs. The bloated face, the sensual\nleer, the restless, vicious eye, the sullen brow tell us what is\ngoing on within. The man's soul is rotting in his body. Lust and\ngreed are eating out of him the capacity for good. And if he passes\non to the eternal harvest as he is, if that fatal corruption is not\narrested, what doom can possibly await such a man but that of which\nour merciful Saviour spoke so plainly that we might tremble and\nescape--\"the worm that dieth not, and the fire that is not quenched!\"\n\nIII. And finally, _God Himself is the Lord of the moral harvest_. The\nrule of retribution, the nexus that binds together our sowing and our\nreaping, is not something automatic and that comes about of itself;\nit is directed by the will of God, who \"worketh all in all.\"\n\nEven in the natural harvest we look upwards to Him. The order and\nregularity of nature, the fair procession of the seasons waiting\non the silent and majestic march of the heavens, have in all ages\ndirected thinking and grateful men to the Supreme Giver, to the\ncreative Mind and sustaining Will that sits above the worlds. As\nPaul reminded the untutored Lycaonians, \"He hath not left Himself\nwithout witness, in that He gave us rains from heaven and fruitful\nseasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.\" It is \"God\" that\n\"gives the increase\" of the husbandman's toil, of the merchant's\nforethought, of the artist's genius and skill. We do not sing our\nharvest songs, with our Pagan forefathers, to sun and rain and west\nwind, to mother Earth and the mystic powers of Nature. In these\npoetic idolatries were yet blended higher thoughts and a sense of\nDivine beneficence. But \"to us there is one God, the Father, of whom\nare all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through\nwhom are all things, and we through Him.\" In the harvest of the\nearth man is a worker together with God. The farmer does his part,\nfulfilling the conditions God has laid down in nature; \"he putteth\nin the wheat in rows, and the barley in its appointed place; for\nhis God doth instruct him aright, and doth teach him.\" He tills the\nground, he sows the seed--and there he leaves it _to God_. \"He sleeps\nand rises night and day; and the seed springs and grows up, he knows\nnot how.\" And the wisest man of science cannot tell him how. \"God\ngiveth it a body, as it hath pleased Him.\" But _how_--that is His own\nsecret, which He seems likely to keep. All life in its growth, as\nin its inception, is a mystery, hid with Christ in God. Every seed\nsown in field or garden is a deposit committed to the faithfulness of\nGod; which He honours by raising it up again, thirty, sixty, or a\nhundred-fold, in the increase of the harvest.\n\nIn the moral world this Divine co-operation is the more immediate,\nas the field of action lies nearer, if one may so say, to the nature\nof God Himself. The earthly harvest may, and does often fail. Storms\nwaste it; blights canker it; drought withers, or fire consumes it.\nIndustry and skill, spent in years of patient labour, are doomed\nnot unfrequently to see their reward snatched from them. The very\nabundance of other lands deprives our produce of its value. The\nnatural creation \"was made subject to vanity.\" Its frustration and\ndisappointment are over-ruled for higher ends. But in the spiritual\nsphere there are no casualties, no room for accident or failure. Here\nlife comes directly into contact with the Living God, its fountain;\nand its laws partake of His absoluteness.\n\nEach act of faith, of worship, of duty and integrity, is a compact\nbetween the soul and God. We \"_commit our souls_ in well-doing unto a\nfaithful Creator\" (1 Pet. iv. 19). By every such volition the heart\nis yielding itself to the direction of the Divine Spirit. It \"sows\nunto the Spirit,\" whenever in thought or deed His prompting is obeyed\nand His will made the law of life. And as in the soil, by the Divine\nchemistry of nature, the tiny germ is nursed and fostered out of\nsight, till it lifts itself from the sod a lovely flower, a perfect\nfruit, so in the order of grace it will prove that from the smallest\nseeds of goodness in human hearts, from the feeblest beginnings of\nthe life of faith, from the lowliest acts of love and service, God in\ndue season will raise up a glorious harvest for which heaven itself\nwill be the richer.\n\n\n\n\n _THE EPILOGUE._\n\n CHAPTER VI. 11-18.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n_THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING._\n\n \"See with how large letters I write unto you with mine own hand.\n As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, they compel\n you to be circumcised; only that they may not be persecuted for\n the cross of Christ. For not even they who receive circumcision\n do themselves keep the law; but they desire to have you\n circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. But far be it\n from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ,\n through which the world hath been crucified unto me, and I unto\n the world.\"--GAL. vi. 11-14.\n\n\nThe rendering of ver. 11 in the Authorised Version is clearly\nerroneous (_see how large a letter_). Wickliff, guided by the Latin\nVulgate--_with what maner lettris_--escaped this error. It is a\n_plural_ term the Apostle uses, which occasionally in Greek writers\ndenotes an epistle (as in Acts xxviii. 21), but nowhere else in Paul.\nMoreover the noun is in the _dative_ (instrumental) case, and cannot\nbe made the object of the verb.\n\nPaul draws attention at this point to his penmanship, to the size\nof the letters he is using and their autographic form. \"See,\" he\nsays, \"I write this in large characters, and under my own hand.\" But\ndoes this remark apply to _the whole Epistle_, or to _its concluding\nparagraph_ from this verse onwards? To the latter only, as we think.\nThe word \"look\" is a kind of _nota bene_. It marks something new,\ndesigned by its form and appearance in the manuscript to arrest the\neye. It was Paul's practice to write through an amanuensis, adding\nwith his own hand a few final words of greeting or blessing, by\nway of authentication.[146] Here this usage is varied. The Apostle\nwishes to give these closing sentences the utmost possible emphasis\nand solemnity. He would print them on the very heart and soul of his\nreaders. This intention explains the language of ver. 11; and it\nis borne out by the contents of the verses that follow. They are a\npostscript, or _Epilogue_, to the Epistle, rehearsing with incisive\nbrevity the burden of all that it was in the Apostle's heart to say\nto these troubled and shaken Galatians.\n\n [146] See 2 Thess. iii. 17, 18; 1 Cor. xvi. 21-23. In ver. 22 of\n the latter passage we can trace a similar autographic message, on\n a smaller scale. Comp. also Philemon 19.\n\nThe past tense of the verb (literally, _I have written_: \u1f14\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1) is\nin accordance with Greek epistolary idiom. The writer associates\nhimself with his readers. When the letter comes to them, Paul _has\nwritten_ what they now peruse. On the assumption that the whole\nEpistle is autographic it is hard to see what object the large\ncharacters would serve, or why they should be referred to just at\nthis point.\n\nVer. 11 is in fact a sensational heading. The last paragraph of the\nEpistle is penned in larger type and in the Apostle's characteristic\nhand, in order to fasten the attention of these impressionable\nGalatians upon his final deliverance. This device Paul employs but\nonce. It is a kind of practice easily vulgarised and that loses\nits force by repetition, as in the case of \"loud\" printing and\ndeclamatory speech.\n\nIn this emphatic final\u00e9 the interest of the Epistle, so powerfully\nsustained and carried through so many stages, is raised to a yet\nhigher pitch. Its pregnant sentences give us--_first_, another\nand still severer denunciation of \"the troublers\" (vv. 12, 13);\n_secondly_, a renewed protestation of the Apostle's devotion to the\ncross of Christ (vv. 14, 15); _thirdly_, a repetition in animated\nstyle of the practical doctrine of Christianity, and a blessing\npronounced upon those who are faithful to it (vv. 15, 16). A pathetic\nreference to the writer's personal sufferings, followed by the\ncustomary benediction, brings the letter to a close. The first two\ntopics of the Epilogue stand in immediate contrast with each other.\n\nI. _The glorying of the Apostle's adversaries._ \"They would have you\ncircumcised, that they may glory in your flesh\" (ver. 12).\n\nThis is the climax of his reproach against them. It gives us the\nkey to their character. The boast measures the man. The aim of the\nLegalists was to get so many Gentiles circumcised, to win proselytes\nthrough Christianity to Judaism. Every Christian brother persuaded\nto submit himself to this rite was another trophy for them. His\ncircumcision, apart from any moral or spiritual considerations\ninvolved in the matter, was of itself enough to fill these\nproselytizers with joy. They counted up their \"cases;\" they rivalled\neach other in the competition for Jewish favour on this ground. To\n\"glory in your flesh--to be able to point to your bodily condition as\nthe proof of their influence and their devotion to the Law--this,\"\nPaul says, \"is the object for which they ply you with so many\nflatteries and sophistries.\"\n\nTheir aim was intrinsically low and unworthy. They \"want to make a\nfair show (to present a good face) in the flesh.\" _Flesh_ in this\nplace (ver. 12) recalls the contrast between _Flesh_ and _Spirit_\nexpounded in the last chapter. Paul does not mean that the Judaizers\nwish to \"make a good appearance _in outward respects, in human\nopinion_:\" this would be little more than tautology. The expression\nstamps the Circumcisionists as \"carnal\" men. They are \"not in the\nSpirit,\" but \"in the flesh;\" and \"after the flesh\" they walk. It is\non worldly principles that they seek to commend themselves, and to\nunspiritual men. What the Apostle says of himself in Phil. iii. 3,\n4, illustrates by contrast his estimate of the Judaizers of Galatia:\n\"We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and glory\nin Christ Jesus, and _have no confidence in the flesh_.\" He explains\n\"having confidence in the flesh\" by enumerating his own advantages\nand distinctions as a Jew, the circumstances which commended him\nin the eyes of his fellow-countrymen--\"which were gain to me,\"\nhe says, \"but I counted them loss for Christ\" (ver. 7). In that\nrealm of fleshly motive and estimate which Paul had abandoned, his\nopponents still remained. They had exchanged Christian fidelity for\nworldly favour. And their religion took the colour of their moral\ndisposition. To _make a fair show_, an imposing, plausible appearance\nin ceremonial and legal observance, was the mark they set themselves.\nAnd they sought to draw the Church with them in this direction, and\nto impress upon it their own ritualistic type of piety.\n\nThis was a worldly, and in their case a _cowardly_ policy. \"They\nconstrain you to be circumcised, only that for the cross of Christ\nthey may not suffer persecution\" (ver. 12). This they were determined\nby all means to avoid. Christ had sent His servants forth \"as sheep\nin the midst of wolves.\" The man that would serve Him, He said, must\n\"follow Him, taking up his cross.\" But the Judaists thought they\nknew better than this. They had a plan by which they could be the\nfriends of Jesus Christ, and yet keep on good terms with the world\nthat crucified Him. They would make their faith in Jesus a means for\nwinning over proselytes to Judaism. If they succeeded in this design,\ntheir apostasy might be condoned. The circumcised Gentiles would\npropitiate the anger of their Israelite kindred, and would incline\nthem to look more favourably upon the new doctrine. These men, Paul\nsays to the Galatians, are sacrificing you to their cowardice.\nThey rob you of your liberties in Christ in order to make a shield\nfor themselves against the enmity of their kinsmen. They pretend\ngreat zeal on your behalf; they are eager to introduce you into the\nblessings of the heirs of Abraham: the truth is, they are victims of\na miserable fear of persecution.\n\nThe cross of Christ, as the Apostle has repeatedly declared (comp.\nChapters XII and XXI), carried with it in Jewish eyes a flagrant\nreproach; and its acceptance placed a gulf between the Christian and\nthe orthodox Jew. The depth of that gulf became increasingly apparent\nthe more widely the gospel spread, and the more radically its\nprinciples came to be applied. To Paul it was now sorrowfully evident\nthat the Jewish nation had rejected Christianity. They would not hear\nthe Apostles of Jesus any more than the Master. For the preaching of\nthe cross they had only loathing and contempt. Judaism recognised in\nthe Church of the Crucified its most dangerous enemy, and was opening\nthe fire of persecution against it all along the line. In this state\nof affairs, for the party of men to compromise and make private terms\nfor themselves with the enemies of Christ was treachery. They were\nsurrendering, as this Epistle shows, all that was most vital to\nChristianity. They gave up the honour of the gospel, the rights of\nfaith, the salvation of the world, rather than face the persecution\nin store for those \"who will live godly in Christ Jesus.\"\n\nNot that they cared so much for the law in itself. Their glorying\nwas _insincere_, as well as selfish: \"For neither do the circumcised\nthemselves keep the law.--These men who profess such enthusiasm for\nthe law of Moses and insist so zealously on your submission to it,\ndishonour it by their own behaviour.\" The Apostle is denouncing the\nsame party throughout. Some interpreters make the first clause of\nver. 13 a parenthesis, supposing that \"the circumcised\" (participle\npresent: _those being circumcised_) are _Gentile perverts_ now being\ngained over to Judaism, while the foregoing and following sentences\nrelate to the Jewish teachers. But the context does not intimate,\nnor indeed allow such a change of subject. It is \"the circumcised\"\nof ver. 13 _a_ who in ver. 13 _b_ wish to see the Galatians\ncircumcised, \"in order to boast over their flesh,\"--the same who,\nin ver. 12, \"desire to make a fair show in the flesh\" and to escape\nJewish persecution. Reading this in the light of the previous\nchapters, there seems to us no manner of doubt as to the persons thus\ndesignated. They are the Circumcisionists, Jewish Christians who\nsought to persuade the Pauline Gentile Churches to adopt circumcision\nand to receive their own legalistic perversion of the gospel of\nChrist. The present tense of the Greek participle, used as it is\nhere with the definite article,[147] has the power of becoming a\n_substantive_, dropping its reference to time; for the act denoted\npasses into an abiding characteristic, so that the expression\nacquires the form of a title. \"The circumcised\" are _the men of the\ncircumcision_, those known to the Galatians in this character.\n\n [147] \u1f41\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 (_Revised Text_). On this idiom, see\n Winer's _Grammar_, p. 444; A. Buttmann's _N. T. Grammar_, p. 296.\n In ch. i. 23, and in ii. 2 (\u03c4. \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9), we have had instances of\n this usage.\n\nThe phrase is susceptible, however, of a wider application. When\nPaul writes thus, he is thinking of others besides the handful of\ntroublers in Galatia. In Rom. ii. 17-29 he levels this identical\ncharge of hypocritical law-breaking against the Jewish people at\nlarge: \"Thou who gloriest in the law,\" he exclaims, \"through thy\ntransgression of the law dishonourest thou God?\" This shocking\ninconsistency, notorious in contemporary Judaism, was to be observed\nin the conduct of the legalist zealots in Galatia. They broke\nthemselves the very law which they tried to force on others. Their\npretended jealousy for the ordinances of Moses was itself their\ncondemnation. It was not the glory of the law they were concerned\nabout, but their own.\n\nThe policy of the Judaizers was dishonourable both in spirit and in\naim. They were false to Christ in whom they professed to believe;\nand to the law which they pretended to keep. They were facing both\nways, studying the safest, not the truest course, anxious in truth\nto be friends at once with the world and Christ. Their conduct has\nfound many imitators, in men who \"make godliness a way of gain,\"\nwhose religious course is dictated by considerations of worldly\nself-interest. A little persecution, or social pressure, is enough to\n\"turn them out of the way.\" They cast off their Church obligations as\nthey change their clothes, to suit the fashion. Business patronage,\nprofessional advancement, a tempting family alliance, the _entr\u00e9e_\ninto some select and envied circle--such are the things for which\ncreeds are bartered, for which men put their souls and the souls\nof their children knowingly in peril. _Will it pay?_--this is the\nquestion which comes in with a decisive weight in their estimate of\nmatters of religious profession and the things pertaining to God. But\n\"what shall it profit?\" is the question of Christ.\n\nNor are they less culpable who bring these motives into play, and put\nthis kind of pressure on the weak and dependent. There are forms of\nsocial and pecuniary influence, bribes and threats quietly applied\nand well understood, which are hardly to be distinguished morally\nfrom persecution. Let wealthy and dominant Churches see to it that\nthey be clear of these offences, that they make themselves the\nprotectors, not the oppressors of spiritual liberty. The adherents\nthat a Church secures by its worldly prestige do not in truth belong\nto the \"kingdom that is not of this world.\" Such successes are no\ntriumphs of the cross. Christ repudiates them. The glorying that\nattends proselytism of this kind is, like that of Paul's Judaistic\nadversaries, a \"glorying in the flesh.\"\n\nII. \"But as for me,\" cries the Apostle, \"far be it to glory, save\nin the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ\" (ver. 14). Paul knows but\none ground of exultation, one object of pride and confidence--_his\nSaviour's cross_.\n\nBefore he had received his gospel and seen the cross in the light\nof revelation, like other Jews he regarded it with horror. Its\nexistence covered the cause of Jesus with ignominy. It marked Him\nout as the object of Divine abhorrence. To the Judaistic Christian\nthe cross was still an embarrassment. He was secretly ashamed of a\ncrucified Messiah, anxious by some means to excuse the scandal and\nmake amends for it in the face of Jewish public opinion. But now this\ndisgraceful cross in the Apostle's eyes is the most glorious thing\nin the universe. Its message is the good news of God to all mankind.\nIt is the centre of faith and religion, of all that man knows of God\nor can receive from Him. Let it be removed, and the entire structure\nof revelation falls to pieces, like an arch without its keystone.\nThe shame of the cross was turned into honour and majesty. Its\nfoolishness and weakness proved to be the wisdom and the power of\nGod. Out of the gloom in which Calvary was shrouded there now shone\nforth the clearest light of holiness and love.\n\nPaul gloried in the cross of Christ because it manifested to him _the\ncharacter of God_. The Divine love and righteousness, the entire\nrange of those moral excellences which in their sovereign perfection\nbelong to the holiness of God, were there displayed with a vividness\nand splendour hitherto inconceivable. \"God so loved the world,\" and\nyet so honoured the law of right, that \"He spared not His own Son,\nbut delivered Him up for us all.\" How stupendous is this sacrifice,\nwhich baffles the mind and overwhelms the heart! Nowhere in the\nworks of creation, nor in any other dispensation of justice or mercy\ntouching human affairs, is there a spectacle that appeals to us with\nan effect to be compared with that of the Sufferer of Calvary.\n\nLet me look, let me think again. Who is He that bleeds on that tree\nof shame? Why does the Holy One of God submit to these indignities?\nWhy those cruel wounds, those heart-breaking cries that speak of\na soul pierced by sorrows deeper than all that bodily anguish can\ninflict? Has the Almighty indeed forsaken Him? Has the Evil One\nsealed his triumph in the blood of the Son of God? Is it God's mercy\nto the world, or is it not rather Satan's hate and man's utter\nwickedness that stand here revealed? The issue shows with whom\nvictory lay in the dread conflict fought out in the Redeemer's soul\nand flesh. \"_God_ was in Christ\"--living, dying, rising. And what was\nHe doing in Christ?--\"reconciling the world unto Himself.\"\n\nNow we know what the Maker of the worlds is like. \"He that hath\nseen Me,\" said Jesus on Passion Eve, \"hath seen the Father. From\nhenceforth ye know Him, and have seen Him.\" What the world knew\nbefore of the Divine character and intentions towards man was but\n\"poor, weak rudiments.\" Now the believer has come to _Peniel_; like\nJacob, he has \"seen the face of God.\" He has touched the centre of\nthings. He has found the secret of love.\n\nMoreover, the Apostle gloried in the cross because it was _the\nsalvation of men_. His love for men made him boast of it, no less\nthan his zeal for God. The gospel burning in his heart and on his\nlips, was \"God's power unto salvation, both to Jew and Greek.\" He\nsays this not by way of speculation or theological inference, but\nas the testimony of his constant experience. It was bringing men by\nthousands from darkness into light, raising them from the slough\nof hideous vices and guilty despair, taming the fiercest passions,\nbreaking the strongest chains of evil, driving out of human hearts\nthe demons of lust and hate. This message, wherever it went, was\n_saving_ men, as nothing had done before, as nothing else has done\nsince. What lover of his kind would not rejoice in this?\n\nWe are members of a weak and suffering race, groaning each in his own\nfashion under \"the law of sin and death,\" crying out ever and anon\nwith Paul, \"O wretched man that I am!\" If the misery of our bondage\nwas acute its darkness extreme, how great is the joy with which we\nhail our Redeemer! It is the gladness of an immense relief, the joy\nof salvation. And our triumph is redoubled when we perceive that His\ngrace brings us not deliverance for ourselves alone, but commissions\nus to impart it to our fellow-men. \"Thanks be to God,\" cries the\nApostle, \"who always leadeth us in triumph, and maketh known the\nsavour of His knowledge by us in every place\" (2 Cor. ii. 14).\n\nThe essence of the gospel revealed to Paul, as we have observed\nmore than once, lay in its conception of the office of the cross of\nChrist. Not the Incarnation--the basis of the manifestation of the\nFather in the Son; not the sinless life and superhuman teaching of\nJesus, which have moulded the spiritual ideal of faith and supplied\nits contents; not the Resurrection and Ascension of the Redeemer,\ncrowning the Divine edifice with the glory of life eternal; but _the\nsacrifice of the cross_ is the focus of the Christian revelation.\nThis gives to the gospel its _saving_ virtue. Round this centre\nall other acts and offices of the Saviour revolve, and from it\nreceive their healing grace. From the hour of the Fall of man the\nmanifestations of the Divine grace to him ever looked forward to\nCalvary; and to Calvary the testimony of that grace has looked\nbackward ever since. \"By this sign\" the Church has conquered; the\ninnumerable benefits with which her teaching has enriched mankind\nmust all be laid in tribute at the foot of the cross.\n\nThe atonement of Jesus Christ demands from us a faith like Paul's,\na faith of _exultation_, a boundless enthusiasm of gratitude and\nconfidence. If it is worth believing in at all, it is worth believing\nin heroically. Let us so boast of it, so exhibit in our lives its\npower, so spend ourselves in serving it, that we may justly claim\nfrom all men homage toward the Crucified. Let us lift up the cross of\nChrist till its glory shines world-wide, till, as He said, it \"draws\nall men unto Him.\" If we triumph in the cross, we shall triumph by\nit. It will carry the Church to victory.\n\nAnd the cross of Jesus Christ is the salvation of men, just because\nit is the revelation of God. It is \"life eternal,\" said Jesus to the\nFather, \"_to know Thee_.\" The gospel does not save by mere pathos,\nbut by knowledge--by bringing about a right understanding between man\nand his Maker, a reconciliation. It brings God and man together in\nthe light of truth. In this revelation we see _Him_, the Judge and\nthe Father, the Lord of the conscience and the Lover of His children;\nand we see _ourselves_--what our sins mean, what they have done. God\nis face to face with the world. Holiness and sin meet in the shock\nof Calvary, and flash into light, each illuminated by contrast with\nthe other. And the view of what God is in Christ--how He judges, how\nHe pities us--once fairly seen, breaks the heart, kills the love of\nsin. \"The glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ,\" sitting on that\nthorn-crowned brow, clothing that bleeding Form rent with the anguish\nof Mercy's conflict with Righteousness on our behalf--it is this\nwhich \"shines in our hearts\" as in Paul's, and cleanses the soul by\nits pity and its terror. But this is no dramatic scene, it is Divine,\neternal fact. \"We have beheld and do testify that the Father sent the\nSon to be the Saviour of the world. We _know_ and have believed the\nlove that God hath to us\" (1 John iv. 14, 16).\n\nSuch is the relation to God which the cross has established for the\nApostle. In what position does it place him toward _the world_? To\nit, he tells us, he has bidden farewell. Paul and the world are dead\nto each other. The cross stands between them. In ch. ii. 20 he had\nsaid, \"_I_ am crucified with Christ;\" in ch. v. 24, that his \"_flesh_\nwith its passions and lusts\" had undergone this fate; and now he\nwrites, \"Through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ _the world_ is\ncrucified to me, and I to the world.\"\n\nLiterally, _a world_--a whole world was crucified for Paul when his\nLord died upon the cross. The world that slew Him put an end to\nitself, so far as he is concerned. He can never believe in it, never\ntake pride in it, nor do homage to it any more. It is stripped of\nits glory, robbed of its power to charm or govern him. The death of\nshame that old \"evil world\" inflicted upon Jesus has, in Paul's eyes,\nreverted to itself; while for the Saviour it is changed into a life\nof heavenly glory and dominion. The Apostle's life is withdrawn from\nit, to be \"hid with Christ in God.\"\n\nThis \"crucifixion\" is therefore mutual. The Apostle also \"is\ncrucified to the world.\" Saul the Pharisee was a reputable, religious\nman of the world, recognised by it, alive to it, taking his place in\nits affairs. But that \"old man\" has been \"crucified with Christ.\" The\npresent Paul is in the world's regard another person altogether--\"the\nfilth of the world, the offscouring of all things,\" no better than\nhis crucified Master and worthy to share His punishment. He is\ndead--\"crucified\" to it. Faith in Jesus Christ placed a gulf, wide\nas that which parts the dead and living, between the Church of the\nApostles and men around them. The cross parted two worlds wholly\ndifferent. He who would go back into that other world, the world of\ngodless self-pleasing and fleshly idolatry, must step over the cross\nof Christ to do it.\n\n\"_To me_,\" testifies Paul, \"the world is crucified.\" And the Church\nof Christ has still to witness this confession. We read in it a\nprophecy. Evil must die. The world that crucified the Son of God, has\nwritten its own doom. With its Satanic Prince it \"has been judged\"\n(John xii. 31; xvi. 11). Morally, it is dead already. The sentence\nhas passed the Judge's lips. The weakest child of God may safely defy\nit, and scorn its boasting. Its visible force is still immense; its\nsubjects multitudinous; its empire to appearance hardly shaken. It\ntowers like Goliath confronting \"the armies of the living God.\" But\nthe foundation of its strength is gone. Decay saps its frame. Despair\ncreeps over its heart. The consciousness of its impotence and misery\ngrows upon it.\n\nWorldliness has lost its old serenity irrecoverably. The cross\nincessantly disturbs it, and haunts its very dreams. Antichristian\nthought at the present time is one wide fever of discontent. It is\nsinking into the vortex of pessimism. Its mockery is louder and more\nbrilliant than ever; but there is something strangely convulsive in\nit all; it is the laughter of despair, the dance of death.\n\nChrist the Son of God _has_ come down from the cross, as they\nchallenged Him. But coming down, He has fastened there in His place\nthe world that taunted Him. Struggle as it may, it cannot unloose\nitself from its condemnation, from the fact that it has killed its\nPrince of Life. The cross of Jesus Christ must save--or destroy. The\nworld must be reconciled to God, or it will perish. On the foundation\nlaid of God in Zion men will either build or break themselves for\never. The world that hated Christ and the Father, the world that Paul\ncast from him as a dead thing, cannot endure. It \"passeth away, and\nthe lust thereof.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIX.\n\n_RITUAL NOTHING: CHARACTER EVERYTHING._\n\n \"For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a\n new creation. And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace _be_\n upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.\"--GAL. vi. 15,\n 16.\n\n\nVerse 14 comprehends the whole theology of the Epistle, and ver. 15\nbrings to a head its practical and ethical teaching. This apophthegm\nis one of the landmarks of religious history. It ranks in importance\nwith Christ's great saying: \"God is a Spirit; and they that worship\nHim, must worship in spirit and truth\" (John iv. 21-24). These\nsentences of Jesus and of Paul taken together mark the dividing line\nbetween the Old and the New Economy. They declare the nature of the\nabsolute religion, from the Divine and human side respectively.\nGod's pure spiritual being is affirmed by Jesus Christ to be\nhenceforth the norm of religious worship. The exclusive sacredness\nof Jerusalem, or of Gerizim, had therefore passed away. On the\nother hand, and regarding religion from its psychological side, as\nmatter of experience and attainment, it is set forth by our Apostle\nas an inward life, a spiritual condition, dependent on no outward\nform or performance whatsoever. Paul's principle is a consequence\nof that declared by his Master. If \"God is a Spirit,\" to be known\nand approached as such, ceremonial at once loses its predominance;\nit sinks into the accidental, the merely provisional and perishing\nelement of religion. Faith is no longer bound to material conditions;\nit passes inward to its proper seat in the spirit of man. And the\ndictum that \"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision nothing\"\n(comp. ch. v. 6; 1 Cor. vii. 19), becomes a watchword of Christian\ntheology.\n\nThis Pauline axiom is advanced to justify the confession of the\nApostle made in ver. 14; it supports the protest of vv. 12-14 against\nthe devotees of circumcision, who professed faith in Christ but\nwere ashamed of His cross. \"That Judaic rite in which you glory,\"\nhe says, \"is nothing. Ritual qualifications and disqualifications\nare abolished. Life in the Spirit, the new creation that begins\nwith faith in Christ crucified--that is everything.\" The boasts of\nthe Judaizers were therefore folly: they rested on \"nothing.\" The\nApostle's glorying alone was valid: the new world of \"the kingdom of\nGod,\" with its \"righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost,\"\nwas there to justify it.\n\nI. _For neither is circumcision anything._--Judaism is abolished at\na stroke! With it circumcision was _everything_. \"The circumcision\"\nand \"the people of God\" were in Israelitish phrase terms synonymous.\n\"Uncircumcision\" embraced all that was heathenish, outcast and\nunclean.\n\nThe Mosaic polity made the status of its subjects, their relation to\nthe Divine covenant, to depend on this initiatory rite. \"Circumcised\nthe eighth day,\" the child came under the rule and guardianship of\nthe sacred Law. In virtue of this mark stamped upon his body, he was\n_ipso facto_ a member of the congregation of the Lord, bound to all\nits duties, so far as his age permitted, and partner in all its\nprivileges. The constitution of Mosaism--its ordinances of worship,\nits ethical discipline, its methods of administration, and the type\nof character which it formed in the Jewish nation--rested on this\nfundamental sacrament, and took their complexion therefrom.\n\nThe Judaists necessarily therefore made it their first object\nto enforce circumcision. If they secured this, they could carry\neverything; and the complete Judaizing of Gentile Christianity was\nonly a question of time. This foundation laid, the entire system of\nlegal obligation could be reared upon it (ch. v. 3). To resist the\nimposition of this yoke was for the Pauline Churches a matter of life\nand death. They could not afford to \"yield by subjection--no, not for\nan hour.\" The Apostle stands forth as the champion of their freedom,\nand casts all Jewish pretensions to the winds when he says, \"Neither\nis _circumcision_ anything.\"\n\nThis absolute way of putting the matter must have provoked the\northodox Jew to the last degree. The privileges and ancestral glories\nof his birth, the truth of God in His covenants and revelations to\nthe fathers, were to his mind wrapped up in this ordinance, and\nbelonged of right to \"the Circumcision.\" To say that circumcision is\nnothing seemed to him as good as saying that the Law and the Prophets\nwere nothing, that Israel had no pre-eminence over the Gentiles, no\nright to claim \"the God of Abraham\" as her God. Hence the bitterness\nwith which the Apostle was persecuted by his fellow-countrymen, and\nthe credence given, even by orthodox Jewish Christians, to the charge\nthat he \"taught to the Jews apostasy from Moses\" (Acts xxi. 21). In\ntruth Paul did nothing of the kind, as James of Jerusalem very well\nknew. But a sentence like this, torn from its context, and repeated\namongst Jewish communities, naturally gave rise to such imputations.\n\nIn his subsequent Epistle to the Romans the Apostle is at pains to\ncorrect erroneous inferences drawn from this and similar sayings of\nhis concerning the Law. He shows that circumcision, in its historical\nimport, was of the highest value. \"What is the advantage of the Jew?\nWhat the benefit of circumcision? Much every way,\" he acknowledges.\n\"Chiefly in that to them were entrusted the oracles of God\" (Rom.\niii. 1, 2). And again: \"Who are Israelites; whose is the adoption,\nand the glory, and the covenants, and the lawgiving, and the service\nof God, and the promises; whose are the fathers,--and of whom is\nthe Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed\nfor ever\" (Rom. ix. 4, 5). Eloquently has Paul vindicated himself\nfrom the reproach of indifference to the ancient faith. Never did\nhe love his Jewish kindred more fervently, nor entertain a stronger\nconfidence in their Divine calling, than at the moment when in that\nEpistle he pronounced the reprobation that ensued on their rejecting\nthe gospel of Christ. He repeats in the fullest terms the claim which\nJesus Himself was careful to assert, in declaring the extinction of\nJudaism as a local and tribal religion, that \"Salvation is of the\nJews\" (John iv. 21-24). In the Divine order of history it is still\n\"to the Jew first.\" But natural relationship to the stock of Abraham\nhas in itself no spiritual virtue; \"circumcision of the flesh\"\nis worthless, except as the symbol of a cleansed and consecrated\nheart. The possession of this outward token of God's covenant\nwith Israel, and the hereditary blessings it conferred, brought\nwith them a higher responsibility, involving heavier punishment\nin case of unfaithfulness (Rom. ii. 17-iii. 8). This teaching is\npertinent to the case of children of Christian families, to those\nformally attached to the Church by their baptism in infancy and by\nattendance on her public rites. These things certainly have \"much\nadvantage every way.\" And yet in themselves, without a corresponding\ninner regeneration, without a true death unto sin and life unto\nrighteousness, these also are nothing. The limiting phrase \"in Christ\nJesus\" is no doubt a copyist's addition to the text, supplied from\nch. v. 6; but the qualification is in the Apostle's mind, and is\nvirtually given by the context. No ceremony is of the essence of\nChristianity. No outward rite by itself makes a Christian. We are\n\"joined to the Lord\" in \"one Spirit.\" This is the vital tie.\n\n_Nor is uncircumcision anything._ This is the counter-balancing\nassertion, and it makes still clearer the bearing of the former\nsaying. Paul is not contending against Judaism in any anti-Judaic\nspirit. He is not for setting up Gentile in the place of Jewish\ncustoms in the Church; he excludes both impartially. Neither, he\ndeclares, have any place \"in Christ Jesus,\" and amongst the things\nthat accompany salvation. Paul has no desire to humiliate the Jewish\nsection of the Church; but only to protect the Gentiles from its\naggressions. He lays his hand on both parties and by this evenly\nbalanced declaration restrains each of them from encroaching on\nthe other. \"Was any one called circumcised\"? he writes to Corinth:\n\"let him not renounce his circumcision. Hath any one been called in\nuncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised.\" The two states alike\nare \"nothing\" from the Christian standpoint. The essential thing is\n\"keeping the commandments of God\" (1 Cor. vii. 18, 19).\n\nChristian Gentiles retained in some instances, doubtless, their\nformer antipathy to Jewish practices. And while many of the Galatians\nwere inclined to Legalism, others cherished an extreme repugnance\nto its usages. The pretensions of the Legalists were calculated to\nexcite in the minds of enlightened Gentile believers a feeling of\ncontempt, which led them to retort on Jewish pride with language of\nridicule. Anti-Judaists would be found arguing that circumcision\nwas a degradation, the brand of a servile condition; and that its\npossessor must not presume to rank with the free sons of God. In\ntheir opinion, _uncircumcision_ was to be preferred and had \"much\nadvantage every way.\" Amongst Paul's immediate followers there may\nhave been some who, like Marcion in the second century, would fain\nbe more Pauline than the Apostle himself, and replied to Jewish\nintolerance with an anti-legal intolerance of their own. To this\nparty it was needful to say, \"Neither is uncircumcision anything.\"\n\nThe pagan in his turn has nothing for which to boast over the man of\nIsrael. This is the caution which the Apostle urges on his Gentile\nreaders so earnestly in Rom. xi. 13-24. He reminds them that they\nowe an immense debt of gratitude to the ancient people of God. Wild\nbranches grafted into the stock of Abraham, they were \"partaking\nof the root and fatness\" of the old \"olive-tree.\" If the \"natural\nbranches\" had been \"broken off through unbelief,\" much more might\nthey. It became them \"not to be high-minded but to fear.\" So Paul\nseeks to protect Israel after the flesh, in its rejection and\nsorrowful exile from the fold of Christ, against Gentile insolence.\nAlas! that his protection has been so little availing. The Christian\npersecutions of the Jews are a dark blot on the Church's record.\n\nThe enemies of bigotry and narrowness too oft imbibe the same spirit.\nWhen others treat us with contempt, we are apt to pay them back\nin their own coin. They unchurch us, because we cannot pronounce\ntheir shibboleths; they refuse to see in our communion the signs of\nChrist's indwelling. It requires our best charity in that case to\nappreciate their excellencies and the fruit of the Spirit manifest in\nthem. \"I am of Cephas,\" say they; and we answer with the challenge\n\"I of Paul.\" Sectarianism is denounced in a sectarian spirit. The\nenemies of form and ceremony make a religion of their Anti-ritualism.\nChurch controversies are proverbially bitter; the love which\n\"hopeth and believeth all things,\" under their influence suffers a\nsad eclipse. On both sides let us be on our guard. The spirit of\npartisanship is not confined to the assertors of Church prerogative.\nAn obstinate and uncharitable pride has been known to spring up in\nthe breasts of the defenders of liberty, in those who deem themselves\nthe exponents of pure spiritual religion. \"Thus I trample on the\npride of Plato,\" said the Cynic, as he trod on the philosopher's\nsumptuous carpets; and Plato justly retorted, \"You do it with greater\npride.\"\n\nThe Apostle would fain lift his readers above the level of this\nlegalist contention. He bids them dismiss their profitless debates\nrespecting the import of circumcision, the observance of Jewish\nfeasts and sabbaths. These debates were a mischief in themselves,\ndestroying the Church's peace and distracting men's minds from the\nspiritual aims of the Gospel; they were fatal to the dignity and\nelevation of the Christian life. When men allow themselves to be\nabsorbed by questions of this kind, and become Circumcisionist or\nUncircumcisionist partisans, eager Ritualists or Anti-ritualists,\nthey lose the sense of proportion in matters of faith and the poise\nof a conscientious and charitable judgement. These controversies\npre-eminently \"minister questions\" to no profit but to the subverting\nof the hearers, instead of furthering \"the dispensation of God,\nwhich is in faith\" (1 Tim. i. 4). They disturb the City of God with\nintestine strife, while the enemy thunders at the gates. Could we\nonly let such disputes alone, and leave them to perish by inanition!\nSo Paul would have the Galatians do; he tells them that the great\nMosaic rite is no longer worth defending or attacking. The best thing\nis to forget it.\n\nII. What then has the Apostle to put in the place of ritual, as\nthe matter of cardinal importance and chief study in the Church of\nChrist? He presents to view _a new creation_.\n\nIt is something _new_ that he desiderates. Mosaism was effete.\nThe questions arising out of it were dying, or dead. The old\nmethod of revelation which dealt with Jew and Gentile as different\nreligious species, and conserved Divine truth by a process of\nexclusion and prohibition, had served its purpose. \"The middle wall\nof partition was broken down.\" The age of faith and freedom had\ncome, the dispensation of grace and of the Spirit. The Legalists\nminimised, they practically ignored the significance of Calvary.\nRace-distinctions and caste-privileges were out of keeping with such\na religion as Christianity. The new creed set up a new order of life,\nwhich left behind it the discussions of rabbinism and the formularies\nof the legal schools as survivals of bygone centuries.\n\nThe novelty of the religion of the gospel was most conspicuous in\n_the new type of character_ that it created. The faith of the cross\nclaims to have produced not a new style of ritual, a new system of\ngovernment, but new men. By this product it must be judged. _The\nChristian_ is the \"new creature\" which it begets.\n\nWhatever Christianity has accomplished in the outer world--the\nvarious forms of worship and social life in which it is embodied, the\nchanged order of thought and of civilisation which it is building\nup--is the result of its influence over the hearts of individual\nmen. Christ, above all other teachers, addressed Himself directly\nto the heart, whence proceed the issues of life. There His gospel\nestablishes its seat. The Christian is the man with a \"new heart.\"\nThe prophets of the Old Testament looked forward to this as the\nessential blessing of religion, promised for the Messianic times\n(Heb. viii. 8-13). Through them the Holy Spirit uttered His protest\nagainst the mechanical legalism to which the religion of the temple\nand the priesthood was already tending. But this witness had fallen\non deaf ears; and when Christ proclaimed, \"It is the Spirit that\nquickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing,\" when He said, \"The things\nthat defile a man come out of his heart,\" He preached revolutionary\ndoctrine. It is the same principle that the Apostle vindicates. The\nreligion of Christ has to do in the first place with the individual\nman, and in man with his heart.\n\nWhat then, we further ask, is the character of this hidden man of\nthe heart, \"created anew in Christ Jesus\"? Our Epistle has given\nus the answer. In him \"faith working by love\" takes the place of\ncircumcision and uncircumcision--that is, of Jewish and Gentile\nceremonies and moralities, powerless alike to save (ch. v. 6).\nLove comes forward to guarantee the \"fulfilling of the law,\"\nwhose fulfilment legal sanctions failed to secure (ch. v. 14). And\nthe Spirit of Christ assumes His sovereignty in this work of new\ncreation, calling into being His array of inward graces to supersede\nthe works of the condemned flesh that no longer rules in the nature\nof God's redeemed sons (ch. v. 16-24).\n\nThe Legalists, notwithstanding their idolatry of the law, did not\n_keep_ it. So the Apostle has said, without fear of contradiction\n(ver. 13). But the men of the Spirit, actuated by a power above law,\nin point of fact do keep it, and \"law's righteousness is fulfilled\"\nin them (Rom. viii. 3, 4). This was a new thing in the earth. Never\nhad the law of God been so fulfilled, in its essentials, as it was by\nthe Church of the Crucified. Here were men who truly \"loved God with\nall their soul and strength, and their neighbour as themselves.\" From\nLove the highest down to Temperance the humblest, all \"the fruit of\nthe Spirit\" in its clustered perfection flourished in their lives.\nJewish discipline and Pagan culture were both put to shame by this\n\"new creation\" of moral virtue. These graces were produced not in\nselect instances of individuals favoured by nature, in souls disposed\nto goodness, or after generations of Christian discipline; but in\nmultitudes of men of every grade of life--Jews and Greeks, slaves and\nfreemen, wise and unwise--in those who had been steeped in infamous\nvices, but were now \"washed, sanctified, justified in the name of the\nLord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.\"\n\nSuch regenerated men were the credentials of Paul's gospel. As he\nlooked on his Corinthian converts, drawn out of the very sink of\nheathen corruption, he could say, \"The seal of my apostleship are\nye in the Lord.\" The like answer Christianity has still to give to\nits questioners. If it ever ceases to render this answer, its day\nis over; and all the strength of its historical and philosophical\nevidences will not avail it. The Gospel is \"God's power unto\nsalvation\"--or it is nothing!\n\nSuch is Paul's _canon_, as he calls it in ver. 16--the rule which\napplies to the faith and practice of every Christian man, to the\npretensions of all theological and ecclesiastical systems. The true\nChristianity, the true churchmanship, is that which turns bad men\ninto good, which transforms the slaves of sin into sons of God. A\ntrue faith is a _saving_ faith. The \"new creation\" is the sign of the\nCreator's presence. It is God \"who quickeneth the dead\" (Rom. iv. 17).\n\nWhen the Apostle exalts character at the expense of ceremonial, he\ndoes this in a spirit the very opposite of religious indifference.\nHis maxim is far removed from that expressed in the famous couplet of\nPope:\n\n \"For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight;\n His can't be wrong whose life is in the right.\"\n\nThe gospel of Christ is above all things a _mode of faith_. The \"new\ncreature\" is a son of God, seeking to be like God. His conception of\nthe Divine character and of his own relationship thereto governs his\nwhole life. His \"life is in the right,\" because his heart is right\nwith God. All attempts to divorce morality from religion, to build up\nsociety on a secular and non-religious basis, are indeed foredoomed\nto failure. The experience of mankind is against them. As a nation's\nreligion has been, so its morals. The ethical standard in its rise\nor fall, if at some interval of time, yet invariably, follows the\nadvance or decline of spiritual faith. For practical purposes, and\nfor society at large, religion supplies the mainspring of ethics.\nCreed is in the long run the determinant of character. The question\nwith the Apostle is not in the least whether religion is vital to\nmorals; but whether this or that formality is vital to religion.\n\n * * * * *\n\nOne cannot help wondering how Paul would have applied his canon to\nthe Church questions of our own day. Would he perchance have said,\n\"Episcopacy is nothing, and Presbyterianism is nothing;--but keeping\nthe commandments of God\"? Or might he have interposed in another\ndirection, to testify that \"Church Establishments are nothing, and\nDisestablishment is nothing; charity is the one thing needful?\"\nNay, can we even be bold enough to imagine the Apostle declaring,\n\"Neither Baptism availeth anything, nor the Lord's Supper availeth\nanything,--apart from the faith that works by love\"? His rule at any\nrate conveys an admonition to us when we magnify questions of Church\nordinance and push them to the front, at the cost of the weightier\nmatters of our common faith. Are there not multitudes of Romanists\non the one hand who have, as we believe, perverted sacraments, and\nQuakers on the other hand who have no sacraments, but who have,\nnotwithstanding, a penitent, humble, loving faith in Jesus Christ?\nAnd their faith saves them: who will doubt it? Although faith must\nordinarily suffer, and does in our judgement manifestly suffer,\nwhen deprived of these appointed and most precious means of its\nexpression and nourishment. But what authority have we to forbid to\nsuch believers a place in the Body of Christ, in the brotherhood of\nredeemed souls, and to refuse them the right hand of fellowship,\n\"who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we\"? \"It is the Spirit\nthat beareth witness:\" who is he that gainsayeth? Grace is more than\nthe means of grace.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace be on them and mercy,\nand upon the Israel of God.\" Here is an Apostolic benediction for\nevery loyal Church. The \"walk\" that the Apostle approves is the\nmeasured, even pace, the steady _march_[148] of the redeemed host\nof Israel. On all who are thus minded, who are prepared to make\nspiritual perfection the goal of their endeavours for themselves and\nfor the Church, Paul invokes God's peace and mercy.\n\n [148] \u03a3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd; comp. ch. v. 25.\n\nPeace is followed by the _mercy_ which guards and restores it. Mercy\nheals backslidings and multiplies pardons. She loves to bind up a\nbroken heart, or a rent and distracted Church. Like the pillar of\nfire and cloud in the wilderness, this twofold blessing rests day\nand night upon the tents of Israel. Through all their pilgrimage it\nattends the children of Abraham, who follow in the steps of their\nfather's faith.\n\nWith this tender supplication Paul brings his warnings and\ndissuasives to an end. For the betrayers of the cross he has stern\nindignation and alarms of judgement. Towards his children in the\nfaith nothing but peace and mercy remains in his heart. As an evening\ncalm shuts in a tempestuous day, so this blessing concludes the\nEpistle so full of strife and agitation. We catch in it once more the\nchime of the old benediction, which through all storm and peril ever\nrings in ears attuned to its note: _Peace shall be upon Israel_ (Ps.\ncxxv. 5).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXX.\n\n_THE BRAND OF JESUS._\n\n \"From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear branded on my\n body the marks of Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be\n with your spirit, brethren. Amen.\"--GAL. vi. 17, 18.\n\n\nThe Apostle's pen lingers over the last words of this Epistle. His\nhistorical self-defence, his theological argument, his practical\nadmonitions, with the blended strain of expostulation and entreaty\nthat runs through the whole--now rising into an awful severity, now\nsinking into mother-like tenderness--have reached their conclusion.\nThe stream of deep and fervent thought pouring itself out in these\npages has spent its force. This prince of the Apostles in word and\ndoctrine has left the Church no more powerful or characteristic\nutterance of his mind. And Paul has marked the special urgency of his\npurpose by his closing message contained in the last six verses, an\nEpistle within the Epistle, penned in large, bold strokes from his\nown hand, in which his very soul transcribes itself before our eyes.\n\nIt only remains for him to append his signature. We should expect him\nto do this in some striking and special way. His first sentence (ch.\ni. 1-10) revealed the profound excitement of spirit under which he is\nlabouring; not otherwise does he conclude. Ver. 17 sharply contrasts\nwith the words of peace that hushed our thoughts at the close of the\nlast paragraph. Perhaps the peace he wishes these troubled Churches\nreminds him of his own troubles. Or is it that in breathing his\ndevout wishes for \"the Israel of God,\" he cannot but think of those\nwho were \"of Israel,\" but no sons of peace, in whose hearts was\nhatred and mischief toward himself? Some such thought stirs anew the\ngrief with which he has been shaken; and a pathetic cry breaks from\nhim like the sough of the departing tempest.\n\nYet the words have the sound of triumph more than of sorrow. Paul\nstands a conscious victor, though wounded and with scars upon him\nthat he will carry to his grave. Whether this letter will serve its\nimmediate purpose, whether the defection in Galatia will be stayed\nby it, or not, the cause of the cross is sure of its triumph; his\ncontention against its enemies has not been in vain. The force of\ninspiration that uplifted him in writing the Epistle, the sense of\ninsight and authority that pervades it, are themselves an earnest of\nvictory. The vindication of his authority in Corinth, which, as we\nread the order of events, had very recently occurred, gave token that\nhis hold on the obedience of the Gentile Churches was not likely to\nbe destroyed, and that in the conflict with legalism the gospel of\nliberty was certain to prevail. His courage rises with the danger. He\nwrites as though he could already say, \"I have fought the good fight.\nThanks be to God, which always leadeth us in triumph\" (2 Tim. iv. 7;\n2 Cor. ii. 14).\n\nThe warning of ver. 17 has the ring of _Apostolic dignity_. \"From\nhenceforth let no man give me trouble!\" Paul speaks of himself as\na sacred person. God's mark is upon him. Let men beware how they\nmeddle with him. \"He that toucheth you,\" the Lord said to His people\nafter the sorrows of the Exile, \"toucheth the apple of Mine eye\"\n(Zech. ii. 8). The Apostle seems to have had a similar feeling\nrespecting himself. He announces that whosoever from this time lays\nan injurious hand upon him does so at his peril. _Henceforth_--for\nthe struggle with Legalism was the crisis of Paul's ministry. It\ncalled forth all his powers, natural and supernatural, into exercise.\nIt led him to his largest thoughts respecting God and man, sin and\nsalvation; and brought him his heaviest sorrows. The conclusion of\nthis letter signalises the culmination of the Judaistic controversy,\nand the full establishment of Paul's influence and doctrinal\nauthority. The attempt of Judaism to strangle the infant Church is\nfoiled. In return it has received at Paul's hands its death-blow. The\nposition won in this Epistle will never be lost; the doctrine of the\ncross, as the Apostle taught it, cannot be overthrown. Looking back\nfrom this point to \"prove his own work,\" he can in all humility claim\nthis \"glorying in regard to himself\" (ver. 4). He stands attested in\nthe light of God's approval as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. He\nhas done the cause of truth an imperishable service. He takes his\nplace henceforth in the front rank amongst the spiritual leaders of\nmankind. Who now will bring reproach against him, or do dishonour to\nthe cross which he bears? Against that man God's displeasure will go\nforth. Some such thoughts were surely present to the Apostle's mind\nin writing these final words. They cannot but occur to us in reading\nthem. Well done, we say, thou faithful servant of the Lord! Ill must\nit be for him who henceforth shall trouble thee.\n\n\"Troubles\" indeed, and to spare, Paul had encountered. He has just\npassed through the darkest experience of his life. The language\nof the Second Epistle to Corinth is a striking commentary upon\nthis verse. \"We are pressed on every side,\" he writes, \"perplexed,\npursued, smitten down\" (ch. iv. 8, 9). His troubles came not only\nfrom his exhausting labours and hazardous journeys; he was everywhere\npursued by the fierce and deadly hatred of his fellow-countrymen.\nEven within the Church there were men who made it their business to\nharass him and destroy his work. No place was safe for him--not even\nthe bosom of the Church. On land or water, in the throngs of the city\nor the solitudes of the desert, his life was in hourly jeopardy (1\nCor. xv. 30; 2 Cor. xi. 26).\n\nBeside all this, \"the care of the Churches\" weighed on his mind\nheavily. There was \"no rest\" either for his flesh or spirit (2 Cor.\nii. 13; vii. 5). Recently Corinth, then Galatia was in a ferment of\nagitation. His doctrine was attacked, his authority undermined by\nthe Judaic emissaries, now in this quarter, now in that. The tumult\nat Ephesus, so graphically described by Luke, happening at the same\ntime as the broils in the Corinthian Church and working on a frame\nalready overstrung, had thrown him into a prostration of body and\nmind so great that he says, \"We despaired even of life. We had the\nanswer of death in ourselves\" (2 Cor. i. 8, 9). The expectation that\nhe would die before the Lord's return had now, for the first time it\nappears, definitely forced itself on the Apostle, and cast over him a\nnew shadow, causing deep ponderings and searchings of heart (2 Cor.\nv. 1-10). The culmination of the legalistic conflict was attended\nwith an inner crisis that left its ineffaceable impression on the\nApostle's soul.\n\nBut he has risen from his sick bed. He has been \"comforted by the\ncoming of Titus\" with better news from Corinth (2 Cor. vii. 6-16).\nHe has written these two letters--the Second to the Corinthians,\nand this to the Galatians. And he feels that the worst is past. \"He\nwho delivered him out of so great a death, will yet deliver\" (2\nCor. i. 10). So confident is he in the authority which Christ gave\nand enabled him to exercise in utter weakness, so signally is he\nnow stamped as God's Apostle by his sufferings and achievements,\nthat he can dare any one from this time forth to oppose him. The\nanathema of this Epistle might well make his opponents tremble. Its\nremorseless logic left their sophistries no place of refuge. Its\npassionate entreaties broke down suspicion and sullenness. Let the\nCircumcisionists beware how they slander him. Let fickle Galatians\ncease to trouble him with their quarrels and caprices. So well\nassured is he for his part of the rectitude of his course and of the\nDivine approval and protection, that he feels bound to warn them that\nit will be the worse for those who at such a time lay upon him fresh\nand needless burdens.\n\nOne catches in this sentence too _an undertone of entreaty_, a\nconfession of weariness. Paul is tired of strife. \"Woe is me,\" he\nmight say, \"that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tents\nof Kedar! My soul hath long had her dwelling with him that hateth\npeace.\" \"Enmities, ragings, factions, divisions\"--with what a\npainful emphasis he dwells in the last chapter on these many forms\nof discord. He has known them all. For months he has been battling\nwith the hydra-headed brood. He longs for an interval of rest. He\nseems to say, \"I pray you, let me be at peace. Do not vex me any\nmore with your quarrels. I have suffered enough.\" The present tense\nof the Greek imperative verb (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9) brings it to bear on the\ncourse of things then going on: as much as to say, \"Let these weapons\nbe dropped, these wars and fightings cease.\" For his own sake the\nApostle begs the Galatians to desist from the follies that caused\nhim so much trouble, and to suffer him to share with them God's\nbenediction of peace.\n\nBut what an argument is this with which Paul enforces his plea,--\"for\nI bear the brand of Jesus in my body!\"\n\n\"The _stigmata_ of Jesus\"--what does he mean? It is \"in my\nbody\"--some marks branded or punctured on the Apostle's person,\ndistinguishing him from other men, conspicuous and humiliating,\ninflicted on him as Christ's servant, and which so much resembled\nthe inflictions laid on the Redeemer's body that they are called\n\"the marks of Jesus.\" No one can say precisely what these brands\nconsisted in. But we know enough of the previous sufferings of the\nApostle to be satisfied that he carried on his person many painful\nmarks of violence and injury. His perils endured by land and sea, his\nimprisonments, his \"labour and travail, hunger and thirst, cold and\nnakedness,\" his three shipwrecks, the \"night and day spent in the\ndeep,\" were sufficient to break down the strength of the stoutest\nframe; they had given him the look of a worn and haggard man. Add\nto these the stoning at Lystra, when he was dragged out for dead.\n\"Thrice\" also had he been beaten with the Roman rods; \"five times\"\nwith the thirty-nine stripes of the Jewish scourge (2 Cor. xi. 23-27).\n\nIs it to these last afflictions, cruel and shameful they were in\nthe extreme, that the Apostle specially refers as constituting\n\"the brand _of Jesus_\"? For Jesus was _scourged_. The allusion of 1\nPet. ii. 24--\"by whose _stripes_ (literally, _bruise_ or _weal_) ye\nwere healed\"--shows how vividly this circumstance was remembered,\nand how strongly it affected Christian minds. With this indignity\nupon Him--His body lashed with the torturing whip, scored with livid\nbruises--our Blessed Lord was exposed on the cross. So He was branded\nas a malefactor, even before His crucifixion. And the same brand Paul\nhad received, not once but many times, for his Master's sake. As the\nstrokes of the scourge fell on the Apostle's shuddering flesh, he had\nbeen consoled by thinking how near he was brought to his Saviour's\npassion: \"The servant,\" He had said, \"shall be as his Lord.\" Possibly\nsome recent infliction of the kind, more savage than the rest, had\nhelped to bring on the malady which proved so nearly fatal to him.\nIn some way he had been marked with fresh and manifest tokens of\nbodily suffering in the cause of Christ. About this time he writes of\nhimself as \"always bearing about in his body the dying of the Lord\nJesus\" (2 Cor. iv. 10); for the corpse-like state of the Apostle,\nwith the signs of maltreatment visible in his frame, pathetically\nimaged the suffering Redeemer whom he preached. Could the Galatians\nhave seen him as he wrote, in physical distress, labouring under the\nburden of renewed and aggravated troubles, their hearts must have\nbeen touched with pity. It would have grieved them to think that they\nhad increased his afflictions, and were \"persecuting him whom the\nLord had smitten.\"\n\nHis scars were badges of dishonour to worldly eyes. But to Paul\nhimself these tokens were very precious. \"Now I rejoice in my\nsufferings for you,\" he writes from his Roman prison at a later\ntime: \"and am filling up what is lacking of the afflictions of Christ\nin my flesh\" (Col. i. 24). The Lord had not suffered everything\nHimself. He honoured His servants by leaving behind a measure of His\nafflictions for each to endure in the Church's behalf. The Apostle\nwas companion of his Master's disgrace. In him the words of Jesus\nwere signally fulfilled: \"They have hated Me; they will also hate\nyou.\" He was following, closely as he might, in the way that led to\nCalvary. All men may know that Paul is Christ's servant; for he wears\nHis livery, the world's contempt. Of Jesus they said, \"Away with Him,\ncrucify Him;\" and of Paul, \"Away with such a fellow from the earth:\nfor it is not fit that he should live\" (Acts xxii. 22). \"Enough for\nthe disciple to be as his Master:\" what could he wish more?\n\nHis condition inspired reverence in all who loved and honoured Jesus\nChrist. Paul's Christian brethren were moved by feelings of the\ntenderest respect by the sight of his wasted and crippled form. \"His\nbodily presence is weak (2 Cor. x. 10): he looks like a corpse!\"\nsaid his despisers. But under that physical feebleness there lay an\nimmense fund of moral vigour. How should he not be weak, after so\nmany years of wearying toil and relentless persecution and torturing\npain? Out of this very weakness came a new and unmatched strength; he\n\"glories in his infirmities,\" for there rests upon him the strength\nof Christ (2 Cor. xii. 9).\n\nUnder the expression \"_stigmata_ of Jesus\" there is couched a\nreference to the practice of marking criminals and runaway slaves\nwith a brand burnt into the flesh, which is perpetuated in our\nEnglish use of the Greek words _stigma_ and _stigmatize_. A man\nso marked was called _stigmatias_, _i.e._, a branded scoundrel;\nand such the Apostle felt himself to be in the eyes of men of the\nworld. Captain Lysias of Jerusalem took him for an Egyptian leader\nof banditti. Honourable men, when they knew him better, learned\nto respect him; but such was the reputation that his battered\nappearance, and the report of his enemies, at first sight gained for\nhim.\n\nThe term _stigmata_ had also another and different signification. It\napplied to a well-known custom of religious devotees to _puncture_,\nor tattoo, upon themselves the name of their God, or other sign\nexpressive of their devotion (Isa. xiiv. 5; Rev. iii. 12). This\nsignification may be very naturally combined with the former in the\nemployment of the figure. Paul's _stigmata_, resembling those of\nJesus and being of the same order, were signs at once of reproach and\nof consecration. The prints of the world's insolence were witnesses\nof his devotion to Christ. He loves to call himself \"the slave of\nChrist Jesus.\" The scourge has written on his back his Master's name.\nThose dumb wounds proclaim him the bondman of the Crucified. At the\nlowest point of personal and official humiliation, when affronts\nwere heaped upon him, he felt that he was raised in the might of the\nSpirit to the loftiest dignity, even as \"Christ was crucified through\nweakness, yet liveth through the power of God\" (2 Cor. xiii. 4.)\n\nThe words _I bear_--not united, as in our own idiom, but standing the\npronoun at the head and the verb at the foot of the sentence--have\neach of them a special emphasis. _I_--in contrast with his opponents,\nman-pleasers, shunning Christ's reproach; and _bear_ he says\nexultantly--\"this is my burden, these are the marks I carry,\"\nlike the standard-bearer of an army who proudly wears his scars\n(Chrysostom). In the profound and sacred joy which the Apostle's\ntribulations brought him, we cannot but feel even at this distance\nthat we possess a share. They belong to that richest treasure of the\npast, the sum of\n\n \"Sorrow which is not sorrow, but delight\n To hear of, for the glory that redounds\n Therefrom to human kind and what we are.\"\n\nThe _stigmatization_ of Paul, his puncturing with the wounds of\nJesus, has been revived in later times in a manner far remote\nfrom anything that he imagined or would have desired. _Francis of\nAssisi_ in the year 1224 A.D. received in a trance the wound-prints\nof the Saviour on his body; and from that time to his death, it\nis reported, the saint had the physical appearance of one who had\nsuffered crucifixion. Other instances, to the number of eighty, have\nbeen recorded in the Roman Catholic Church of the reproduction, in\nmore or less complete form, of the five wounds of Jesus and the\nagonies of the cross; chiefly in the case of nuns. The last was that\nof Louise Lateau, who died in Belgium in the year 1883. That such\nphenomena have occurred, there is no sufficient reason to doubt. It\nis difficult to assign any limits to the power of the human mind over\nthe body in the way of sympathetic imitation. Since St. Francis' day\nmany Romanist divines have read the Apostle's language in this sense;\nbut the interpretation has followed rather than given rise to this\nfulfilment. In whatever light these manifestations may be regarded,\nthey are a striking witness to the power of the cross over human\nnature. Protracted meditation on the sufferings of our Lord, aided\nby a lively imagination and a susceptible physique, has actually\nproduced a rehearsal of the bodily pangs and the wound-marks of\nCalvary.\n\nThis mode of knowing Christ's sufferings \"after the flesh,\" morbid\nand monstrous as we deem it to be, is the result of an aspiration\nwhich however misdirected by Catholic asceticism, is yet the highest\nthat belongs to the Christian life. Surely we also desire, with Paul,\nto be \"made conformable to the death of Christ.\" On our hearts His\nwounds must be impressed. Along the pathway of our life His cross\nhas to be borne. To all His disciples, with the sons of Zebedee, He\nsays, \"Ye shall indeed drink of My cup; and with the baptism that I\nam baptized withal shall ye be baptized.\" But \"it is the Spirit that\nquickeneth,\" said Jesus; \"the flesh profiteth nothing.\" The pains\nendured by the body for His sake are only of value when, as in Paul's\ncase, they are the result and the witness of an inward communion of\nthe Spirit, a union of the will and the intelligence with Christ.\n\nThe cup that He would have us drink with Him, is one of sorrow for\nthe sins of men. His baptism is that of pity for the misery of our\nfellows, of yearning over souls that perish. It will not come upon\nus without costing many a pang. If we receive it there will be ease\nto surrender, gain and credit to renounce, self to be constantly\nsacrificed. We need not go out of our way to find our cross; we have\nonly not to be blind to it, not to evade it when Christ sets it\nbefore us. It may be part of the cross that it comes in a common,\nunheroic form; the service required is obscure; it consists of a\nmultitude of little, vexing, drudging sacrifices in place of the\ngrand and impressive sacrifice, which we should be proud to make. To\nbe martyred by inches, out of sight--this to many is the cruellest\nmartyrdom of all. But it may be Christ's way, the fittest, the only\nperfect way for us, of putting His brand upon us and conforming us to\nHis death.\n\nYes, conformity of spirit to the cross is _the mark of Jesus_. \"If\nwe suffer with Him\"--so the Apostolic Churches used to sing--\"we\nshall also be glorified together.\" In our recoil from the artificial\npenances and mortifications of former ages, we are disposed in\nthese days to banish the idea of mortification altogether from\nour Christian life. Do we not study our personal comfort in an\nun-Christlike fashion? Are there not many in these days, bearing the\nname of Christ, who without shame and without reproof lay out their\nplans for winning the utmost of selfish prosperity, and put Christian\nobjects in the second place? How vain for them to cry \"Lord, Lord!\"\nto the Christ who \"pleased not Himself!\" They profess at the Lord's\nTable to \"show His death;\" but to show that death in their lives,\nto \"know\" with Paul \"the fellowship of His sufferings,\" is the last\nthing that enters into their minds. How the scars of the brave\nApostle put to shame the self-indulgence, the heartless luxury, the\neasy friendship with the world, of fashionable Christians! \"Be ye\nfollowers of me,\" he cries, \"as I also of Christ.\" He who shuns that\npath cannot, Jesus said, be My disciple.\n\nSo the blessed Apostle has put his mark to this Epistle. To the\nColossians from his prison he writes, \"Remember my bonds.\" And to\nthe Galatians, \"Look on my wounds.\" These are his credentials; these\nare the armorial bearings of the Apostle Paul. He places the seal of\nJesus, the sign-manual of _the wounded hand_ upon the letter written\nin His name.\n\n\nTHE BENEDICTION.\n\nOne benediction the Apostle has already uttered, in ver. 16. But that\nwas a general wish, embracing all who should walk according to the\nspiritual rule of Christ's kingdom. On his readers specifically he\nstill has his blessing to pronounce. He does it in language differing\nin this instance very little from that he is accustomed to employ.\n\n\"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ\" is the distinctive blessing of\nthe New Covenant. It is to the Christian the supreme good of life,\nincluding or carrying with it every other spiritual gift. _Grace_ is\nChrist's property. It descended with the Incarnate Saviour into the\nworld, coming down from God out of heaven. His life displayed it;\nHis death bestowed it on mankind. Raised to His heavenly throne, He\nhas become on the Father's behalf the dispenser of its fulness to\nall who will receive it. There exalted, thence bestowing on men \"the\nabundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness,\" He is known and\nworshipped as _our Lord Jesus Christ_.\n\nWhat this grace of God in Christ designs, what it accomplishes in\nbelieving hearts, what are the things that contradict it and make it\nvoid, this Epistle has largely taught us. Of its pure, life-giving\nstream the Galatians already had richly tasted. From \"Christ's grace\"\nthey were now tempted to \"remove\" (ch. i. 6). But the Apostle hopes\nand prays that it may abide with them.\n\n\"With your spirit,\" he says; for this is the place of its visitation,\nthe throne of its power. The spirit of man, breathed upon by the Holy\nSpirit of God, receives Christ's grace and becomes the subject and\nthe witness of its regenerating virtue. This benediction contains\ntherefore in brief all that is set forth in the familiar three fold\nformula--\"the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,\nand the communion of the Holy Ghost.\"\n\nAfter all his fears for his wayward flock, all his chidings and\nreproofs, forgiveness and confidence are the last thoughts in Paul's\nheart: \"Brethren\" is the last word that drops from the Apostle's\npen,--followed only by the confirmation of his devout _Amen_.\n\n * * * * *\n\nTo his readers also the writer of this book takes leave to address\nthe Apostle Paul's fraternal benediction: THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS\nCHRIST BE WITH YOUR SPIRIT, BRETHREN. AMEN.\n\n\n * * * * *\n\nTranscriber's note:\n\nText enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).\n\nSmall capital text has been replaced with all capitals.\n\nVariations in spelling, punctuation and hyphenation have been\nretained except in obvious cases of typographical error.\n\nThe cover for the eBook version of this book was created by the\ntranscriber and is placed in the public domain.\n\nPage 130: The transcriber has inserted an anchor for footnote number\n49 \"Rom. ii. 25-iii. 1\".\n\nPage 210: The transcriber has changed \"Gen. xxii. 8 16--1\" to \"Gen.\nxxii. 16-18\".\n\nPage 251: (As enemies, \"we were reconciled to God by the death of His\nSon;\") Missing opening double quote was added by the transcriber.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the Galatians","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":132296}