The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the GalatiansFindlay, George G. (George Gillanders)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the Galatians
Findlay, George G. (George Gillanders)
Bible. Galatians -- Commentaries
negative answer; and Jewish and Gentile Christianity must have been
driven asunder.
[37] Acts xv. 28: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us."
This was in the Early Church no mere pious official form.
The answer, the triumphant answer, to Paul's appeal comes in the next
verse: "Nay, not even[38] Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was
compelled to be circumcised." Titus _was not circumcised_, in point
of fact--how can we doubt this in view of the language of ver. 5:
"Not even for an hour did we yield in subjection?" And he "was _not
compelled_ to be circumcised"--a mode of putting the denial which
implies that in refusing his circumcision urgent solicitation had
to be withstood, solicitation addressed to Titus himself, as well as
to the leaders of his party. The kind of pressure brought to bear in
the case and the quarter from which it proceeded, the Galatians would
understand from their own experience (ch. vi. 12; comp. ii. 14).
[38] For this use of ἀλλ' οὐδὲ compare Acts xix. 2 (here also
after a question); 1 Cor. iii. 2; iv. 3. We observe a similar
instance of the phrase in Æschylus, _Persæ_, l. 792. Ἀλλ' opposes
itself to the expectation of the Judaistic "compellers," present
to the mind of Paul and his readers.
The attempt made to bring about Titus' circumcision signally failed.
Its failure was the practical reply to the question which Paul tells
us (ver. 2) he had put to the authorities in Jerusalem; or, according
to the more common rendering of ver. 2_b_, it was the answer to the
apprehension under which he addressed himself to them. On the former
of these views of the connection, which we decidedly prefer, the
authorities are clear of any share in the "compulsion" of Titus.
When the Apostle gives the statement that his Gentile companion
"was not compelled to be circumcised" as the reply to his appeal to
"those of repute," it is as much as to say: "The chiefs at Jerusalem
did not require Titus' circumcision. They repudiated the attempt
of certain parties to force this rite upon him." This testimony
precisely accords with the terms of the rescript of the Council, and
with the speeches of Peter and James, given in Acts xv. But it was
a great point gained to have the liberality of the Jewish Christian
leaders put to the proof in this way, to have the generous sentiments
of speech and letter made good in this example of uncircumcised
Christianity brought to their doors.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account