when he himself insisted on circumcision. Comp. v. II and the note on i. 10. By stating how he acted in the case of Titus, who was truly a Gentile, he rebuffs this assertion.

3-5. 'But while I held conferences with the Apostles of the Circumcision, I did not yield to the clamours of the disciples of the Circumcision. An incident which occurred will show this. Titus, as a Gentile who was intimately acquainted with me, was singled out as a mark for their bigotry. An attempt was made to have him circumcised. Concession was even urged upon me in high quarters, as a measure of prudence to disarm opposition. The agitators, who headed the movement, were no true brethren, no loyal soldiers of Christ. They were spies who had made their way into the camp of the Gospel under false colours and were striving to undermine our liberty in Christ, to reduce us again to a state of bondage. I did not for a moment yield to this pressure. I would not so compromise the integrity of the Gospel, the freedom of the Gentile Churches.'

3. ovde Tiros] 'not even Titus.' Why 'not even'? Is it (1) 'not even Titus, who as my fellow-labourer would be brought constantly in contact with the Jews, and therefore might well have adopted a conciliatory attitude towards them'? Compare the case of Timothy, Acts xvi. 3, 'Him would Paul have go forth with him, and took and circumcised him on account of the Jews, etc.' In this case ó σùv éuoi is emphatic. Or is it (2) 'not even Titus, though the pressure exerted in his case was so great'? A more exact knowledge of the circumstances than we possess would alone enable us to answer this question. Perhaps both ideas may be combined here.

"Eλλny v] 'being a Greek,' perhaps giving the reason why the point was

not conceded. There seems to be a tacit allusion to the case of Timothy. 'You maintain,' St Paul seems to argue, 'that I allowed the validity of the Mosaic law in circumcising Timothy (Acts xvi. 1, 3). But Timothy was half of Jewish parentage. How did I act in the case of Titus, a true Gentile ? I did not yield for a moment.'

In Ελλην all idea of nationality is lost: comp. Mark vii. 26 ‘Eλλŋvis Evροφοινίκισσα (or Σύρα Φοινίκισσα) τῷ yével. Thus the Peshito sacrificing the letter to the spirit frequently translates "Env 'an Aramæan,' e.g. here and iii. 28. See Colossians, p. 390.

vaykáσon]' was compelled,' though the pressure was extreme. This pressure doubtless came from the more bigoted Judaizers, the converted Pharisees mentioned in Acts xv. 5.

4. What part was taken in the dispute by the Apostles of the Circumcision? This question, which forces itself upon us at this stage of St Paul's narrative, is not easily answered. On the whole it seems probable that they recommended St Paul to yield the point, as a charitable concession to the prejudices of the Jewish converts: but convinced at length by his representations, that such a concession at such a time would be fatal, they withdrew their counsel and gave him their support. Such an account of the transaction seems to accord alike with the known facts and with the probabilities of the case. It is consistent with the timid conduct of Peter at Antioch shortly after (Gal. ii. 11), and with the politic advice of James at a later date (Acts xxi. 20). It was the natural consequence of their position, which led them to regard tenderly the scruples of the Jewish converts. It supplies probable antecedents to the events of the Apostolic congress. And lastly, it best explains St Paul's language here. The sensible undercurrent of

feeling, the broken grammar of the sentence, the obvious tenour of particular phrases, all convey the impression, that though the final victory was complete, it was not attained without a struggle, in which St Paul maintained at one time almost singlehanded the cause of Gentile freedom.

διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους κ.τ.λ.] ‘But to satisfy, to disarm, the false brethren, the traitorous spies of the Gospel'-At this point the connexion of the sentence is snapped, and we are left to conjecture as to the conclusion. It seems as if St Paul intended to add, 'the leading Apostles urged me to yield.' But instead of this a long parenthesis interposes, in the course of which the main proposition of the sentence is lost sight of. It is again resumed in a different form, 'from those then who were held in repute,' ver. 6. Then again it disappears in another parenthesis. Once more it is taken up and completed, transformed by this time into a general statement, 'well, they of reputation added nothing to me in conference.' The counsels of the Apostles of the Circumcision are the hidden rock on which the grammar of the sentence is wrecked. For διὰ τοὺς παρ. ψευδ. compare Acts xvi. 3 περιέτεμεν αὐτὸν διὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους.

Of other possible explanations two deserve to be considered; (1) That there is an ellipsis of οὐκ ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι οι οὐ περιετμήθη after διὰ τοὺς παρεισ. ψευδαδ. So Fritzsche, Opusc. p. 181. (2) That the parenthesis flows back into the main proposition, so that the regular construction would have been διὰ τοὺς παρεισ. ψευδαδ. οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν, the oἷs being redundant. See the note, ver. 6. So Winer, § lxiii. p. 711 8q. But as

Titus would not have been circumcised under any circumstances, the refusal to yield could scarcely be attributed to the pressure from the false brethren. If either of these explanations were adopted, St Paul's meaning must be: To the scruples of the weaker brethren I would have conceded the point, but the teaching of the false brethren made concession impossible.' So in fact Augustine takes it, de Mendac. § 8 (VL p. 424, ed. Ben.).

παρεισάκτους, παρεισῆλθον] The metaphor is that of spies or traitors introducing themselves by stealth into the enemy's camp, as in Jude 4 πарεισέδυσαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι. See Plut. Ρopl. 17 ἐπιβουλεύων δὲ τὸν Πορσίναν ἀνελεῖν παρεισῆλθεν εἰς τὸ σтраrómedov, Polyb. i. 7. 3, ii. 55. 3. For παρεισάγειν 800 Pet. ii. 1. The adjective occurs in Strabo, xvii. p. 794 παρείσακτος ἐπικληθεὶς Πτολεμαῖος. The camp thus stealthily entered is the Christian Church. Pharisees at heart, these traitors assume the name and garb of believers.

κатаσкожησα] 'to act as spies on!' κατασκοπεῖν generally signifies to ex amine carefully,' the form KATAσKOTEVE being most frequently used where the notion of treachery is prominent. For instances of the sense in the text however see 2 Sam. x. 3, 1 Chron. xix. 3.

καταδουλώσουσιν] reduce to abject slavery.' The reading of the received text, καταδουλώσωνται, is a correction of some classicist, introduced for two reasons: (1) To substitute the middle voice, which is more common in classical writers; the transcriber not seeing that the sense here requires the active; 'enslave not to themselves, but to an external power, the law of

Moses.' (2) To restore the usual classical government of iva with the conjunctive. "Iva however is found several times in the New Testament with the indicative future, and sometimes even with the indicative present, as in iv. 17: see Winer, § xli. p. 360 sq. This, though not a classical usage, is justified by similar constructions of όπως, ὄφρα, in classical writers.

5. ois ovdè K.T.λ.] 'to whom we,' Paul and Barnabas, who were sent to Jerusalem to plead the cause of the Gentile Christians, ' yielded no not for an hour! For the omission of ols ovde in some texts see the detached note, p. 122.

ThпоTaуn] 'by the submission which was required of us,' or possibly 'the submission with which we are taunted,' as in 2 Cor. i. 17 μήτι ἄρα τῇ ἐλαφρία ἐχρησάμην ;

ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου] ' the truth of the Gospel,' i.e. the Gospel in its integrity. This expression in St Paul's language denotes the doctrine of grace, the maintenance of Christian liberty, as opposed to the false teaching of the Judaizers. See ii. 14, and comp. Col. i. 5, 6, where the same idea seems to be indirectly involved.

διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς] 'may abide with you,' the Gentile Churches. See the introduction, p. 26. The idea of firm possession is enforced by the compound verb, by the past tense, and by the preposition.

6-9. 'The elder Apostles, I say, who are so highly esteemed, whose authority you so exclusively uphold for myself, I care not that they once knew Christ in the flesh: God does not so judge men; He measures them not by the outward advantages they have had, not by the rank they hold, but by what they are, by what they think and do-well, these highly es

ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν, οὐδέν

teemed leaders taught me nothing new; they had no fault to find with me. On the contrary, they received me as their equal, they recognised my mission. They saw that God had entrusted to me the duty of preaching to the Uncircumcision, as He had entrusted to Peter that of preaching to the Circumcision. This was manifest from the results. My Apostleship had been sealed by my work. God had wrought by me among the Gentiles, not less than He had wrought by Peter among the Jews. This token of His grace bestowed upon me was fully recognised by James and Cephas and John, who are held in such high esteem, as pillars of the Church. They welcomed myself and Barnabas as fellow-labourers, and exchanged pledges of friendship with us. It was agreed that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the Jews.'

Much force is lost in the A. V. by translating of doKouvres throughout this passage as a past tense instead of a present. St Paul is speaking not of the esteem in which the leading Apostles of the Circumcision were held by the Christians of Jerusalem at the time of the conferences, but of the esteem in which they are held, while he is writing, by his Galatian converts. The mistake seems to have arisen from following the Vulgate 'qui videbantur.' The Old Latin apparently had the present in most recensions, though not consistently in all four places. Of the older English Versions, Tyndale's alone translates by a present in this verse, and the Genevan in verse 9.

τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι] those who are looked up to as authorities.' The expression is sometimes used in a depreciatory way, as in Plat. Apol. 41 E ἐὰν δοκῶσί τι εἶναι μηδὲν ὄντες, Εuthyd. 303 ο τῶν πολλῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ τῶν

σεμνῶν δὴ καὶ δοκούντων τι εἶναι οὐδὲν ὑμῖν μέλει, Gorg. 472 Δ ἐνίοτε γὰρ ἂν καὶ καταψευδομαρτυρηθείη τις ὑπὸ πολλῶν καὶ δοκούντων εἶναί τι, and passages from later writers quoted in Wetstein: comp. Gal. vi. 3 εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν, and Ignat. Polyc. 3. The exact shade of meaning which it bears must always be determined by the context. Here it is depreciatory, not indeed of the Twelve themselves, but of the extravagant and exclusive claims set up for them by the Judaizers. Thus it is nearly an equivalent to οἱ ὑπερλίαν ἀπόστολοι of 2 Cor. xi. 5, xii. II.

ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν] Does ὁποῖοί ποτε here mean ' qualescunque, or has ποτὲ its proper temporal sense 'in times past' In a classical writer we should decide for the former: in St Paul the latter seems more probable, as ποτὲ never occurs with the meaning 'cunque' in the New Testament, and accordingly it is rendered in the Latin versions aliquando.' This decides the import of the whole phrase. It does not mean 'what reputation they enjoyed,' but 'what was their position, what were their advantages in former times,' referring to their personal intercourse with the Lord. The 'knowing Christ after the flesh' (2 Cor. v. 16) is in itself valueless in the sight of God. The same reproach is conveyed by the words here, as in 2 Cor. Σ. 7 τὰ κατὰ πρόσωπον βλέπετε.

πρόσωπον λαμβάνει] A translation of the Hebrew D'an Nuy which signifies properly to accept the face' (Gesenius Thes. p. 916, s. v. NY]), or perhaps better, 'to raise the face' of another opposed to D'E S'En to make the countenance fall,' e.g. Job xxix. 24 ; comp. Gen. iv. 5), and hence

“ to receive kindly,' 'to look favourably upon one.' In the Old Testament accordingly it is a neutral expression involving no subsidiary idea of partiality, and is much oftener found in a good than in a bad sense. When it becomes an independent Greek phrase however, the bad sense attaches to it, owing to the secondary meaning of πρόσωπον as 'a mask, so that πρόσωπου λαμβάνειν signifes 'to regard the external circumstances of a man,' his rank, wealth, etc., as opposed to his real intrinsic character. Thus in the New Testament it has always a bad sense. Hence a new set of words, προσωπολήμπτης, προσωπολημπτείν, etc. which appear to occur there for the first time.

Θεὸς ἀνθρώπου] The natural order is altered for two reasons; (1) To give Θεός an emphatic position, and (2) Το keep the contrasted words eòs árθρώπου together.

ἐμοὶ γὰρ κ.τ.λ.] The sentence, which was begun in ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι and then broken off by the parenthesis, is here resumed, but in a different form, 'well, to me those of reputation communicated nothing.' See the note on ver. 4. Otherwise the γὰρ may be attached to ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει, the parenthesis running back into the main proposition of the sentence, 'whatever position they once held makes no matter to me: for to me they communicated nothing': Winer § lxiii. p. 711 sq. But the interposition of the words πρόσ. Θ. ἀνθρ. οὐ λαμβ. is an objection to this construction.

προσανέθεντο] ' communicated, see the note on i. 16. Προσανατίθεσθαι is 'to communicate, to impart,' whether for the purpose of giving or of obtain

ing instruction. In this passage the former meaning prevails, in i. 16 the latter. The context here decides its sense: 'they imparted no fresh knowledge to me, they saw nothing defective or incorrect in my teaching; but on the contrary, they heartily recognised my mission.'

7. πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγ.] 'I have been entrusted with the Gospel,' a common construction in St Paul: see the note on i Thess. ii. 4. The perfect here, implying a permanent commission, contrasts with the aorist in Rom. iii. 2 ἐπιστεύθησαν τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ.

τὸ εὐαγγ. τῆς ἀκροβυστίας] denotes a distinction of sphere and not a difference of type: see Tertul. Praescr. Haer. 23 Inter se distributionem officii ordinaverunt, non separationem evangelii, nec ut aliud alter sed ut aliis alter praedicarent.'

8. ὁ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ] ‘He that worked for Peter. For the omission of ὁ Θεὸς comp. i. 6, 15; for ένεργεῖν see the note on i Thess. ii. 13. The dative Πέτρῳ ought probably to be translated 'for Peter,' not 'in Peter'; comp. Prov. xxxi. 12 ἐνεργεῖ γὰρ τῷ ἀνδρὶ (γυνὴ ἀνδρεία) εἰς ἀγαθὰ πάντα τὸν βίον. Α8 ἐνεργεῖν is an inseparable compound, it is doubtful whether the preposition could govern Πέτρα, and accordingly the construction elsewhere is ἐνεργεῖν ἔν τινι. Comp. Acta Paul. et Thecl. § 40 ὁ γὰρ σοὶ συνεργήσας εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κἀμοὶ συνήργησεν εἰς τὸ λούσασθαι.

9. Of the two words ἰδόντες and γνόντες, the former describes the apprehension of the outward tokens of his commission, as evinced by his successful labours; the latter the conviction arrived at in consequence that the

Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρνάβα

grace of God was with him : see iv. 8, 9.

Ιάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης] The best supported and doubtless the right reading. The variation Πέτρος καὶ Ἰάκωβος καὶ Ἰωάννης arose from the desire of maintaining the precedence of St Peter. On the other hand the correct text presents two coincidences with the narrative of the Acts, which deserve notice. First. In i. 19 James is styled the Lord's brother, while here and in ver. 12 this designation is dropped. St Luke's narrative explains this omission. In the interval between St Paul's two visits James the son of Zebedee had been put to death. No term of distinction therefore was now needed, as there was no likelihood of confusion, James the son of Alphæus though an Apostle not holding any very prominent rank. Secondly. The relative positions here assigned to Peter and James accord exactly with the account in the Acts. When St Paul is speaking of the missionary office of the Church at large, St Peter holds the foremost place (ver. 7, 8); when he refers to a special act of the Church of Jerusalem, St James is mentioned first (ver. 9). See Acts xii. 17, XV. 13, Σχί. 18.

στύλοι] ‘pillars. A natural metaphor occurring now and then in classical writers (e.g. Eur. Iph. Τ. 57 στῦλοι γὰρ οἴκων εἰσὶ παῖδες ἄρσενες, and Asch. Agam. 897), but commonly used by the Jews in speaking of the great teachers of the law. See the examples given in Schöttgen: comp. Clem. Hom. xviii. 14 ἑπτὰ στύλους ὑπάρξαντας κόσμῳ, said of the patriarchs. So in Clem. Rom. § 5 the Apostles Peter and Paul are called of μέγιστοι καὶ δικαιότατοι στύλοι ; comp. Iren. iv. 21. 3. In this metaphor the