{"id":29012,"date":"2022-09-24T13:04:30","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T18:04:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-galatians-110\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T13:04:30","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T18:04:30","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-galatians-110","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-galatians-110\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Galatians 1:10"},"content":{"rendered":"

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

10<\/strong>. For do I now men, or God?<\/em> ] The particle ‘for’ connects this verse with what precedes. ‘I speak thus decisively and strongly, for in the first place my motives are pure and cannot be impugned; and secondly ( Gal 1:11<\/em><\/span> foll.) the truths which I deliver are a revelation from God.’<\/p>\n

now<\/em> ] ‘at this stage of my ministry.’ He could not be charged with a desire for popularity, which leads men to sinful concessions. He may be indirectly referring to the case of Peter, which is fully narrated, ch. Gal 2:11<\/span>, &c.<\/p>\n

persuade men, or God<\/em> ] The one word ‘persuade’, which cannot properly be applied to God, is used with both nouns by the grammatical figure Zeugma<\/em>. “Can it be said of me now, that I am courting the favour of men, or am I seeking the favour of God?” The word rendered ‘persuade’ is translated “made their friend”, Act 12:20<\/span>. For the more common use of the verb, comp. 2Co 5:11<\/span>, “we persuade men.”<\/p>\n

if I yet of Christ<\/em> ] If I any longer acted as men act by nature, before conversion to God. The ‘men-pleaser’ (Eph 6:6<\/span>; Col 3:22<\/span>) stands in strong contrast to the ‘servant’, the bondslave of Christ. “No man can serve (be a slave to) two masters,” Mat 6:24<\/span>. The ‘slave’ not only does the will of his master, he belongs to his master.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

For do I now persuade men, or God? – <\/B>The word now (<\/SPAN><\/span> arti) is used here, evidently, to express a contrast between his present and his former purpose of life. Before his conversion to Christianity, he impliedly admits, that it was his object to conciliate the favor of people; that he derived his authority from them Act 9:1-2<\/span>; that he endeavored to act so as to please them and gain their good esteem. But now he says, this was not his object. He had a higher aim. It was to please God, and to conciliate His favor. The object of this verse is obscure; but it seems to me to be connected with what follows, and to be designed to introduce that by showing that he had not now received his commission from human beings, but had received it from God. perhaps there may be an allusion to an implied allegation in regard to him. It may have been alleged (see the notes at the previous verses) that even he had changed his mind, and was now himself an observer of the laws of Moses. To this, perhaps, he replies, by this question, that such conduct would not have been inconsistent in his view, when it was his main purpose to please people, and when he derived his commission from them; but that now he had a higher aim.<\/P>

His purpose was to please God; and he was not aiming in any way to gratify people. The word which is rendered persuade here (<\/SPAN><\/span> peitho), has been very variously interpreted. Tyndale renders it: seek now the favor of men or of God? Doddridge: Do I now solicit the favor of men or of God? This also is the interpretation of Grotius, Hammond, Elsner, Koppe, Rosenmuller, Bloomfield, etc. and is undoubtedly the true explanation. The word properly means to persuade, or to convince; Act 18:4<\/span>; Act 28:23<\/U><\/span>; 2Co 5:11<\/span>. But it also means, to bring over to kind feelings, to conciliate, to pacify, to quiet. Septuagint, 1Sa 24:8<\/span>; 2<\/span> Macc. 4:25; Act 12:20<\/U><\/span>; 1Jo 3:19<\/span>. By the question here, Paul means to say, that his great object was now to please God. He desired Gods favor rather than the favor of man. He acted with reference to His will. He derived his authority from God, and not from the Sanhedrin or any earthly council. And the purpose of all this is to say, that he had not received his commission to preach from man, but had received it directly from God.<\/P>

Or do I seek to please men? – <\/B>It is not my aim or purpose to please people, and to conciliate their favor; compare 1Th 2:4<\/span>.<\/P>

For if I yet pleased men – <\/B>If I made it my aim to please people: if this was the regulating principle of my conduct. The word yet here (<\/SPAN><\/span> eti) has reference to his former purpose. It implies that this had once been his aim. But he says if he had pursued that purpose to please people; if this had continued to be the aim of his life, he would not now have been a servant of Christ. He had been constrained to abandon that purpose in order that he might be a servant of Christ; and the sentiment is, that in order that a man may become a Christian, it is necessary for him to abandon the purpose of pleasing people as the rule of his life. It may be implied also that if in fact a man makes it his aim to please people, or if this is the purpose for which he lives and acts, and if he shapes his conduct with reference to that, he cannot be a Christian or a servant of Christ. A Christian must act from higher motives than those, and he who aims supremely at the favor of his fellowmen has full evidence that he is not a Christian. A friend of Christ must do his duty, and must regulate his conduct by the will of God, whether people are pleased with it or not.<\/P>

And it may be further implied that the life and deportment of a sincere Christian will not please people. It is not what they love. A holy, humble, spiritual life they do not love. It is true, indeed, that their consciences tell them that such a life is right; that they are often constrained to speak well of the life of Christians, and to commend it; it is true that they are constrained to respect a person who is a sincere Christian, and that they often put confidence in such a person; and it is true also that they often speak with respect of them when they are dead; but the life of an humble, devoted, and zealous Christian they do not love. It is contrary to their views of life. And especially if a Christian so lives and acts as to reprove them either by his words or by his life; or if a Christian makes his religion so prominent as to interfere with their pursuits or pleasures, they do not love it. It follows from this:<\/P>

(1) That a Christian is not to expect to please people. He must not be disappointed, therefore, if he does not. His Master did not please the world; and it is enough for the disciple that he be as his Master.<\/P>

(2) A professing Christian, and especially a minister, should be alarmed when the world flatters and caresses him. He should fear either:<\/P> <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. That he is not living as he ought to do, and that sinners love him because he is so much like them, and keeps them in countenance; or,<\/li>\n
      \n
    1. That they mean to make him betray his religion and become conformed to them.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/ol>\n

      It is a great point gained for the frivolous world, when it can, by its caresses and attentions, get a Christian to forsake a prayer-meeting for a party, or surrender his deep spirituality to engage in some political project. Woe unto you, said the Redeemer, when all men speak well of you, Luk 6:26<\/span>.<\/P>

      (3) One of the main differences between Christians and the world is, that others aim to please people; the Christian aims to please only God. And this is a great difference.<\/P>

      (4) It follows that if people would become Christians, they must cease to make it their object to please people. They must be willing to be met with contempt and a frown; they must be willing to be persecuted and despised; they must he willing to lay aside all hope of the praise and the flattery of people, and be content with an honest effort to please God.<\/P>

      (5) True Christians must differ from the world. Their aims, feelings, purposes must be unlike the world. They are to be a special people; and they should be willing to be esteemed such. It does not follow, however, that a true Christian should not desire the good esteem of the world, or that he should be indifferent to an honorable reputation 1Ti 3:7<\/span>; nor does it follow logically that a consistent Christian will not often command the respect of the world. In times of trial, the world will put confidence in Christians; when any work of benevolence is to be done, the world will instinctively look to Christians; and, notwithstanding, sinners will not love religion, yet they will secretly feel assured that some of the brightest ornaments of society are Christians, and that they have a claim to the confidence and esteem of their fellow-men.<\/P>

      The servant of Christ – <\/B>A Christian.<\/P><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/span><\/p>\n

      For do I now persuade men, or God?<\/em><\/p>\n

      or do I seek to please men?<\/p>\n

      I. That the governing principle and motive of the religious life, is a practical concern not for the favour of man, but for that of god. Do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. The particle now seems to contrast his present line of conduct as a Christian with his former procedure as a Pharisee. Here we perceive, therefore, the high standard of moral action which Christianity enabled St. Paul to propose to himself. His object was not to please men, but God. Conventional utility is the standard of the world; and to please each other, so far as mutual interests can be advanced by the process, has been, time out of mind, the highest object contemplated in the codes of worldly men. But the Christian standard is far higher; and its results upon society, wherever it is acted upon, are invaluable. In every inquiry as to practical duty, Christianity brings the idea of the Supreme Being immediately before the mind–the great originator of human obligations–the infallible arbiter of human conduct–the final judge of human actions. The gospel is pre-eminently the religion of motives, and takes especial cognizance not only of what we do, but why we do it; and teaches us to inquire, not merely into the correctness of the action itself, but into the views and feelings whence it originated. In asserting his own freedom from selfish considerations, St. Paul incidentally taxes the false apostles with being governed by these debasing characteristics, their motives being notoriously too corrupt to bear the light. A supreme concern for the favour and friendship of God, as it is the governing principle of the religious life, has always distinguished the favoured servants of Christ. It was this principle of love and loyalty to heaven that induced Moses to relinquish the fleeting honours of a court, and to set at nought alike the treasures of Egypt and the frown of kings; for he endured at <\/strong>seeing Him who is invisible. This led the fathers of the Reformation, the Waldenses of the Continent, and the Puritans of a succeeding age, to endure obloquy, persecution, and martyrdom itself, rather than surrender the claims of conscience, or renounce their allegiance to the King of kings. And as the same causes must produce the same effects, this principle will induce us to take a decided part in the contest always going on.<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>The source whence all true knowledge of the gospel is to be derived, whether as a matter of doctrine or as a matter of experience. I certify to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of <\/strong>me was not after man, for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. The religion we profess is not of man, but of God. This conviction is necessary.<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>To satisfy our reason as men.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>To relieve our fears as sinners.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>To promote our usefulness as Christians.<\/p>\n

      Improvement:<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>A broad line of distinction between the Christian and the hypocrite. The one seeks to commend himself to man, the other to God. The nominal Christian may say, I received my religion as an heirloom from my ancestors, or through the medium of educational bias and conviction; or from the lip of some eloquent expounder of evangelical doctrine; but the genuine disciple may, with unpresuming eye, look upwards and say, I received it, not of man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Again. It teaches us to distinguish between the varieties of character which obtain within the precincts of the Church itself, between Christian and Christian, between those who give token of advanced spirituality and ripeness for heaven, and those of inferior attainments and of less vigorous piety. One star differeth from another star in glory. Some attain an early maturity, and some continue children in understanding to a late period in life. Some run with patience the race set before them; others halt in their mid-way course, and long to unclasp their armour, if they do not surrender their shield. Some, like the children of Israel at Horeb, are satisfied to skirt the base of the Mount; whilst others, like Moses, ascend its summit, converse with God face to face, an& bear about them much of the brightness and blessedness of the region in which they had found their happiness and their home. Some, like the Galatians, give ear to something very much like another gospel; others, like the apostle, amidst lamented infirmities, firmly abide by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Finally, Our subject reads aH impressive lesson to the ministers of religion. They must not, as Perkins judiciously remarks, content themselves with that teaching which they find in the schools; but they must learn Christ as Paul learned Him. They that would convert others must be effectually converted. John must first eat <\/strong>the book, and then prophesy. (The Evangelist.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Men-pleasing condemned<\/strong><\/p>\n


      I. <\/strong>The humour of desiring to be pleased, and the danger of it. A parasite is more welcome to us than a prophet. He is our apostle who <\/strong>will bring familiar and beloved arguments to persuade us to that to which we have persuaded ourselves already, and further our motion to that to which we are flying. Men would rather be cozened with a pleasing lie, than saved with a frowning and threatening truth. The causes from which this desire to be pleased proceedeth, and its hitter effects. 1.<\/p>\n

      (1)<\/strong> And, first, it hath no better original than defect, than a wilful and negligent failing in those duties to which nature and religion have obliged us, a leanness and emptiness of the soul, which, not willing to fill itself with righteousness, filleth itself with air, with false counsels and false attestations, with miserable comforts. It is a thing soon done, and requireth no labour nor study, to be pleased. We desire it as sick men do health, as prisoners do liberty, as men on the rack do ease: for a troubled spirit is an ill disease; not to have our will is the worst imprisonment; and to condemn a mans self in that which he alloweth and maketh his choice (Rom 14:22<\/span>), is to put himself upon the rack. We may see it in our civil affairs and matters of lesser alloy: when anything lieth upon us as a burden, how willing are we to cast it off! When we are poor, we dream of riches, and make up that which is not with that which may be (Pro 23:5<\/span>). When we have no house to hide our heads, we build a palace in the air. We are unwilling to suffer, but we are willing, nay, desirous, to be eased. And so it falleth out in the managing of our spiritual estate: we do as the apostle exhorteth (though not to this end), cast away everything that presseth down (Heb 12:1<\/span>); but so cast it away as to leave it heavier than before; prefer a momentary ease, which we beg or borrow or force from things without us, before that peace which nothing can bring in but that grief and serious repentance which we put off with hands and words as a thing irksome and unpleasing.<\/p>\n

      (2)<\/strong> And thus, in the second place, proceedeth even from the force and power of conscience within us, which, ii we will not hearken to it as a friend, will turn Fury, and pursue and lash us; and if we will not obey her dictates, will make us feel her whip. This is our judge and our executioner.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Let us now see the danger of this humour, and the bitter effects it doth produce.<\/p>\n

      (1)<\/strong> And, first, this desire to be pleased placeth us out of all hope of succour, leaveth us like an army besieged when the enemy hath cut off all relief. It is a curse itself, and carrieth a train of curses with it. It maketh us blind to ourselves, and not fit to make use of other mens eyes.<\/p>\n

      (2)<\/strong> For, in the second place, this humour, this desire to be pleased, doth not make up our defects, but maketh them greater; doth not make vice a virtue,but sin more sinful. For he is a villain indeed that will be a villain, and yet be thought a saint; such a one as God will spew out of His mouth.<\/p>\n

      (3)<\/strong> For, in the third place, this humour, this desire to be pleased, doth not take the whip from conscience, but enrageth her; layeth her asleep, to awake with more terror. For conscience may be seared indeed (1Ti 4:2<\/span>), but cannot be abolished; may sleep, but cannot die, but is as immortal as the soul itself. Conscience followeth our knowledge; and it is impossible to chase that away, impossible to be ignorant of that which I cannot but know. It is not conscience but our lusts that make the music.<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>We proceed now to lay open the other evil humour, of pleasing men, Which is more visible and eminent in the text. And indeed to desire to be pleased and to be ready to please, saith Isidore Pelusiot, to flatter and to be flattered, bear that near relation the one to the other that we never meet them asunder. It is the devils net, in which he catcheth two at once. If there be an itching ear, you cannot miss but you shall find a flattering tongue. If the king of Sicily delight in geometry, the whole court shall swarm with mathematicians. If Nero be lascivious, his palace shall be turned into a stew or brothelhouse, or worse. And, first, we must not imagine that St. Paul doth bring in here a cynical morosity or a Nabal-like churlishness; that none may speak to us, and we speak nothing but words; that we should make a noise like a dog, and so go round about the city (Psa 59:6-14<\/span>); that we should be as thorns in our brethrens sides, ever pricking and galling them. What, then, is that which here St. Paul condemneth? Look into the text, and you shall see Christ and men as it were two opposite terms. If the man be in error, I must not please him in his error; for Christ is truth: if the man be in sin, I must not please him; for Christ is righteousness. So when men stand in opposition to Christ, when men will neither hear His voice nor follow Him in His ways, but delight themselves in their own, and rest and please themselves in error as in truth, to awake them out of this pleasant dream, we must trouble them, we must thunder to them, we must disquiet and displease them. For who would give an opiate pill to these lethargies? To please men, then, is to tell a sick man <\/strong>that he is well; a weak man, that he is strong; an erring man, that he is orthodox; instead of purging out the noxious humour, to nourish and increase it; to smooth and strew the ways of error with roses, that men may walk with ease and delight, and even dance to their destruction; to find out their palate, and to fit it; to envenom that more which they affect, as Agrippina gave Claudius the emperor poison in a mushroom. What a seditious flatterer is in a commonwealth, that a false apostle is in the Church. They are as loud for the truth as the best champions she hath; but either subtract from it, or add to it, or pervert and corrupt it, that so the truth itself may help to usher in a lie. When the truth itself doth not please us, any lie will please us; but then it must carry with it something of the truth. For instance: to acknowledge Christ, but with the law, is a dangerous mixture: it was the error of the Galatians here.<\/p>\n


      III. <\/strong>You see now what it is to please men, and from whence it proceedeth, from whence it springeth, even from that bitter root, the root of all evil, the love of the world. Let us now behold that huge distance and inconsistency which is between these two, the pleasing of men, and the service of Christ: If I yet please men, I am not the servant of Christ.<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>And, first, we cannot do both, not serve men and Christ, no more than you can draw the same straight line to two points, to touch them both (Mat 6:24<\/span>).<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Secondly. The servant must have his eye upon his master; and as he seeth him do, must do likewise. Power cannot flatter; and mercy is so intent on its work that it thinketh of nothing else. To work wonders to please men were the greatest wonder of all.<\/p>\n

      Application:<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>For conclusion, then: Let them who are set apart to lead others in the way of truth and righteousness take heed.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>And of the person by His doctrine.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>And therefore, in the last place, let us all, both teachers and hearers, purge out this evil humour of pleasing and being pleased: and let us, as the apostle exhorteth, consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works (Heb 10:24<\/span>). Let us speak truth every one to his neighbour; for we are members one of another (Eph 4:25<\/span>). (A. Faringdon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Applause of conscience best<\/strong><\/p>\n

      One applause of conscience is worth all the triumphs in the world. (A. Faringdon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Truth better than flattery<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Thou shalt not see thy brother sin; but thou shalt rebuke and save thy brother (Lev 19:17<\/span>). Common charity requireth thus much at thy hand: and to make question of it is as if thou shouldst ask with Cain, Am I my brothers keeper? (Gen 4:9<\/span>). This is the true and surest method of pleasing one another. For flattery, like the bee, carrieth honey in its mouth, but hath a sting in its tail; but truth is sharp and bitter at first, but at last more pleasant than manna. He that would seal up thy lips for the truth which thou speakest, will at last kiss those lips, and bless God in the day of His visitation. And this if we do, we shall please one another to edification (Rom 15:2<\/span>), and not unto ruin. And thus all shall be pleased; the Physician, that he hath his intent, and the patient in his health: the strong shall be pleased in the weak, and the weak in the strong; the wise in the ignorant, and the ignorant in the wise: and Christ shall be well pleased to see brethren thus walk together in unity, strengthening and inciting one another in the ways of righteousness; and when we have thus walked hand-in-hand together to our journeys end, He shall admit us into His presence, where there is fulness of joy and pleasures for evermore (Psa 16:11<\/span>). (A. Faringdon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Sinners not to be flattered<\/strong><\/p>\n

      We <\/em>should not mould and fit our best part to their worst, our reason to their lust; nor make our fancy the elaboratory to work out such essays as may please and destroy them. We should not foment the anger of the revenger to consume him, nor help the covetous to bury himself alive, nor the ambitious to break his neck, nor the schismatic to rend the seamless coat of Christ, nor the seditious to swim to hell in a river of blood: but we should bind the revengers hands, break the misers idols, bring down the ambitious to the dust, make up those rents which faction hath made, and confine the seditious to his own sphere and place. When the world pleaseth us, we are as willing to please the world, and we make it our stage, and act our parts; we call ourselves friends, and are but parasites; we call ourselves prophets, and are but wizards and jugglers; we call ourselves apostles, and are seducers; we call ourselves brethren, though it be in evil, and, like Hippocrates twins, we live and die together. We flatter, and are flattered; we are blind, and leaders of the blind, and fall together with them into the ditch. (A. Faringdon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Apostolic unpopularity<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The gospel is unpopular<\/p>\n

      (1)<\/strong> Because of its holiness. It is the expression of the will of the All-holy, and demands submission and conformity to that will. Issuing from the fountain of purity, it calls for purity in every part. Only those who have the love of God in their hearts can appreciate and welcome it. To all others it must always be hateful.<\/p>\n

      (2)<\/strong> Because of its mysteriousness. Christ can only be apprehended by those who receive Him in faith; to others He is an enigma, and His salvation a thing beyond understanding; and men love not that which they are unable to comprehend. Pride of intellect protests against the gospels admitted mysteriousness.<\/p>\n

      (3)<\/strong> Because of its exclusiveness. It claims to be the one true system, and that all others are false; a claim which makes enemies of every other religions votaries, and of those who–caring for no religion themselves–would tolerate all.<\/p>\n

      (4)<\/strong> Because of its freeness. Men would prefer if the gospel asked for something at their hands, recognized that there was such a thing as human merit. A free gospel deals a blow to their self.conceit and self-satisfaction.<\/p>\n

      (5)<\/strong> Because of its aggressiveness. It is not content to leave men to themselves; and they resent every attempt at interference with them. The gospel offers no terms of compromise. In the name of God it demands unconditional submission. It aims at universal conquest. Hence its unpopularity with the world. (Emilius Bayley, B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Christian firmness<\/strong><\/p>\n


      I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>Christian firmness is not self-willed indifference to human opinion. On the contrary, the Christian is anxious to please and yield to others wherever his own interests alone are concerned. Many things he might rightly claim, he will shrink from pressing; many things that he may suffer, he will quietly submit to, rather than irritate the minds of men against the piety that he professes, or close the door against the future possibility of being the instrument of their conversion. Self-renunciation for the honour of God, or for the good of man, is the special spirit of a Christian. Nay, more; he will spare the feelings and humours of men whenever he lawfully can, doing things in their way rather than his own, being careful of appearances as well as realities. (Rom 12:17-18<\/span>; 2Co 8:21<\/span>; 1Ti 3:7<\/span>; etc.)<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>Nor is it selfish inattention to human welfare. Salvation is not to be achieved in isolated effort, but is wrought out in the very nourishment and growth of those affections, occupations, and energies, which our duties in the world produce. There cannot be a genuine desire to save our own soul, a true Christian spirit of personal piety, which will not, from its very nature, expand beyond the confines of our own bosom, and overflow in copious streams towards all with whom we have to do.<\/p>\n


      III. <\/strong>It is simply paramount obedience to Divine authority. Pleasing men must always be subordinate to pleasing God. Every concession must be with a reservation of our Masters rights and privileges, honour and authority; every treaty must be so, for it is only good as it may be acknowledged and ratified by Him. All things may be tried for Him; hut nothing listened to against Him. (Prebendary Griffith.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Right and wrong men-pleasing<\/strong><\/p>\n

      We are not to please men, be they never so many or great, out of flatness of spirit, so as, for the pleasing of them, either go to neglect any part of our duty towards God and Christ; or<\/p>\n

      (2)<\/strong> to go against our own conscience, by doing any dishonest or unlawful thing; or,<\/p>\n

      (3)<\/strong> to do them harm whom we would please, by confirming them in their sins, humouring them in their peevishness, or but even cherishing their weakness; for weakness, though it may be borne with, yet it must not be cherished.<\/p>\n

      (4)<\/strong> But then, by yielding to their infirmities for a time, in hope to win them, by patiently expecting their conversion, or strengthening, by restoring them with the spirit of meekness, with meekness instructing them that oppose themselves, should we seek to please all men. (Bishop Christopher Wordsworth.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Two earnest questions<\/strong><\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>Which seekest thou most–mans favour, or Gods favour?<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Which is weightier–mans favour, or Gods favour? (J. P. Lange, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Ministerial faithfulness and discretion<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The love of popularity is a temptation from which few of us probably are free. The conscientious minister is constantly reminded of the fact that the fear of man bringeth a snare. In our public and private ministrations we often have to advocate truths which are uncongenial and unwelcome to many of those to whom we minister. A clear, decided, pointed application of Gods Word, must be unwelcome to the worldly, the careless, the self-indulgent, and the self-righteous. But we are naturally reluctant to forfeit the good opinion of others. Hence the temptation to modify, if not to hold back, offensive truths; to present our message, not in its naked simplicity, but in such a manner as shall disarm opposition; to avoid anything like close dealing with the conscience; to busy ourselves only with pointless generalities; to seek rather to please the imagination and gratify the taste, than to awaken conscience, to convince of sin, and to urge the surrender of heart and life to Christ. It is easy enough, by a little contrivance, to make our gospel popular. It is possible to teach truth, and nothing but truth, and yet to give no offence. We have only to modify our statements, or to generalize our applications, and the thing is done. We have but to omit an unpalatable truth, or so to state it as that none need apply it to themselves, and no objection will be raised. Men will tolerate, nay, approve of, a modified system of evangelical truth, to whom the entire presentment of such truth would be unacceptable. Four times, in a single verse, is the prophet warned against this temptation: And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words; be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks (Eze 2:6<\/span>). And the Apostle Paul was fully conscious of the danger when he said, I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God (Act 20:27<\/span>). At the same time; we must be careful that our unpopularity springs from legitimate causes: from the unreasonable opposition of the world to the truth of God, not from the just dislike of men to offensive peculiarities or positive faults. A Christian may be unpopular because he is vain, conceited, selfish, ungenial, narrow-minded, dogmatic, or the like. He may impute his unpopularity to his religion; whereas it comes rather from his want of religion: it originates not in the doctrine which he professes, but in his failure to adorn that doctrine in his daily life. Want of tact, again, in Christians often provokes opposition. The attempt to press the claims of religion upon others at unseasonable times, the employment of technical religious phraseology, the use of theological words and expressions not commonly heard in society, the thrusting of religious idiosyncrasies upon the unwilling and unsympathizing, are causes which frequently operate to the detriment of the principles which we have at heart. Christians should beware of mistaking forwardness for fidelity, and an obtrusive familiarity with sacred things for the honest outflowings of the heart full of love to God and man. Christian prudence is as needful, as worldly compromise is dangerous and wrong. In a word, we must not court unpopularity, or provoke it needlessly, or think that it never arises from any fault of our own. But, on the other hand, we must not dread it, lest we place ourselves among those who love the praise of men more than the praise of God. Ministers must ask, not how they may best please their congregations, but how they may save souls; not how they may stand well with the world, but how they may best serve their Master. (Emilius Bayley, B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Men-pleasing<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Theodoric, an Arian king, did exceedingly affect a certain deacon, although orthodox. The deacon, thinking to please him better, and get preferment, became an Arian, which, when the king understood he changed his love into hatred, and caused his head to be struck from his shoulders. (Trapp.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Pleasing men or serving Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n

      A <\/em>railway-gate keeper who, one cold night required every passenger to show his ticket before passing through to the train, and was rewarded with considerable grumbling and protesting, was told, You are a very unpopular man to-night. I only care to be popular with one <\/strong>man, was the reply, and that is the superintendent. He might have pleased the passengers, disobeyed orders, and lost his position. He was too wise for that; his business was to please one man–the man who hired him, gave him his orders, and rewarded him for faithfulness, and who would discharge him for disobedience. The servant of Christ has many opportunities to make himself unpopular. There are multitudes who would be glad to have him relax the strictness of his rules. If he is their servant they demand that he should consult their wishes. But if he serves them, he cannot serve the Lord. No man can serve two masters. He who tries to be popular with the world, will lose his popularity with the Lord. He will make friends, but he will lose the one Friend who is above all others. He will win plaudits, but he will not hear the gracious word, Well done! A<\/em> faithful servant<\/em>:–Not the least interesting of the monuments I saw amid the venerable ruins of Rome was one which held within its broken urn some half-burned bones. They were the ashes of one, who, as appeared from the inscription on the tablet, had belonged to Caesars household, and to the memory of whose virtues as a faithful, honest, and devoted servant, the emperor himself had ordered that marble to be raised. (T. Guthrie, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      A ministerial alternative<\/strong><\/p>\n


      I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>To please men by–<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>Watering down the doctrines of the gospel until they mean whatever hearers like to make them.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Toning down the precepts of the gospel until they are undistinguishable from the maxims of worldly policy.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>Introducing secular expedients to attract audiences over whom an attenuated gospel has host its power.<\/p>\n

      4. <\/strong>Sinking the stern preacher of righteousness in the bland mover-about in society.<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>To serve Christ by–<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>The proclamation of unalterable trust.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>The insistence of, and personal conformity to, a high moral standard.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>The disdain of mere clap-trap and popular arts.<\/p>\n

      4. <\/strong>The imitation of the self-denying example of the Master. The one may please men; the other will save them. Bondage to man or to Christ<\/em>:—<\/em><\/p>\n


      I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>The necessity to please men represents in a very typical manner the non-freedom of the unredeemed man. This is a real slavery because–<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>It disturbs the development of an independent plan of life.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>It is a part of the bondage of sin.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>It involves servitude to the customs and fashions of the world.<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>Freedom from this yoke is only gained by entering the service of Christ. Just as the servant of a king boasts of his office as <\/strong>the highest liberty, so can we when we serve the Lord Christ.<\/p>\n


      III. <\/strong>Deliverance from the fear of man and the necessity of pleasing him, and servitude to Christ and pleasing Him, may be taken as a general description of Christian liberty. In conclusion–<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>Has the desire to have the good opinion of my neighbours any part in my profession of religion?<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Even if my religious service is not done to be seen of men, is it a thing of form or principle?<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>Have I courage to dissent from the usages of society if my conscience protests? Do I always set before me, What does Christ demand? and not, What will men say? (Professor Robertson Smith.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      The servant of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n


      I. <\/strong>The servant.<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>He realizes the most perfect ideal of life. Others live for pleasure, wealth, fame; he for Christ.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>He has the best Master.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>He yields to the most valid claims–property, protection, redemption.<\/p>\n

      4. <\/strong>He has the strongest warrants–reason, conscience, love.<\/p>\n

      5. <\/strong>He is promised and enjoys the noblest reward–his Masters smile, his Sovereigns throne.<\/p>\n


      II. <\/strong>His service.<\/p>\n

      1. <\/strong>It is dignified in its sphere.<\/p>\n

      2. <\/strong>Grand in its motive–pleasing God.<\/p>\n

      3. <\/strong>Splendid in its instrument–the gospel.<\/p>\n

      4. <\/strong>Glorious in the freedom of its consecration.<\/p>\n

      5. <\/strong>Beneficent in the uses which it serves.<\/p>\n

      Persuading God<\/strong><\/p>\n

      What the apostle means is making sure that God is with him. This can <\/strong>only be done by taking Gods way as ours, and not by hoping to get Him to, take ours as His. This much Paul says in vindication of his severity, whose office was that of a persuader of men. Nay, he says, the question is not of gaining over men, but of standing right with God, and that even at the expense of an absolute breach with men. At such a time as this, when deceitful men are striving to undo all my work for Christ, so far from being called to conciliate them, were I to do so I should not be a servant of Christ. (Professor Robertson Smith.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Man-pleasing a vice in a moral reformer<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Watch the author of a first poem or novel. What eagerness to see all the reviews; what anxiety till they come out; what manoeuvring to ascertain what people have said! And how many persons are there that, even after their apprenticeship in literature or art is over, can honestly affirm that the feeling has quite left them? Raphael must have liked to hear his pictures praised: nor was the <\/strong>approbation of the public a matter of indifference to the octogenarian Goethe, But though the artist or the literateur <\/em>may so far make a merit of popularity it is quite different with the moral teacher or agent in great social changes. Popularity may happen to flow toward such a man, but it should not be treated as a reward or incentive, but rather as a means of deciding what proportion of society has been moved in the direction of his own spirit, and how much yet remains to be brought into subjection. In certain cases, indeed, it might be proper to lay it down as a maxim that he cannot honestly or efficiently accomplish his office without exciting opposition at every step he takes. (North British Review.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Men-pleasing–its danger<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The <\/em>wise Phocion was so sensible how dangerous it was to be touched with what the multitude approved, that upon a general acclamation made when he was making an oration he turned to an intelligent friend and asked in a surprised manner, What slip have I made? (Steele.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Men-pleasing the source of unfaithfulness<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The <\/em>soul that cannot entirely trust God, whether man be pleased or displeased, can never long be true to Him for while you are eyeing men you are losing God and stabbing religion at the very heart. (T. Manton.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Men-pleasing–its cure<\/strong><\/p>\n

      When one has learned to seek the honour that cometh from God only, he will take the withholding of the honour that cometh by man very lightly indeed. (Geo. Macdonald.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      The alternative to men-pleasing<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Do not preach so much to please as to profit. Choose rather to discover mens sins than to show your own eloquence. That is the best looking-glass, not which is most gilded but which shows the truest face. (T. Watson.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      The servant of Christ<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The title which the apostle gives himself, the servant, or the slave, of Christ, expresses, we may be sure, no mere acquiescence in some current fashion of Eastern speech, but the aspect <\/strong>of his life and conduct which he desires to keep before himself and others. St. Paul belonged to two worlds, the Jewish and the Greek, and in this title he has both worlds in view. In the language of the Psalter, and of the Hebrew prophets, every Israelite is, as such, a servant of the Lord, and to the collective people, viewed in its separate and its consecrated life, it is said, Thou, Israel, art My servant, thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, thou art My servant, I have chosen thee. But besides this general and ethical meaning, the title had a technical, official force. Any man who was marked out from among his fellows as having a special work to do for the Lord, was regarded as taken into the service of the invisible King, whose livery he thus wore by the force of events, and by his acts, and by the tenour of his life, in the eyes of his countrymen. In this sense, too, every member of the prophetic order came in time to be termed a servant of the Lord; and the title reached its highest significance when, in the later group of Isaiahs writings, it was used of the King Messiah, whose future humiliation and glory there mingled indistinctly with the nearer, although still distant, suffering and deliverance of the martyred people in Babylon. When, then, St. Peter and St. Jude, writing to Churches mainly or entirely of Jewish origin, styled themselves servants of Jesus Christ, they probably understood the title, chiefly if not exclusively, in the traditional and narrower Hebrew sense. But when St. Paul, writing to the Roman or Philippian Church, calls himself a servant of Christ, it is difficult to suppose that he does not read into the title the meaning which his readers would naturally find there, In these Churches, consisting altogether or predominantly of converts from heathendom, the phrase would rather suggest the ordinary slave of the GreekRoman world, than an inspired or distinguished servant of the Hebrew theocracy. That unseen, that immense population of human beings which worked, which suffered in silence, which tilled the fields, which manned the fleets, which constructed the palaces and the bridges of the world, which supplied to those who had property and power their cooks, their carpenters, their painters, their astronomers, their doctors, their poets, their copyists, their gladiators, their buffoons; which ministered to the refinement, intelligence, luxury, passions of the wealthy; which by its ceaseless and almost unnoticed waste of unregarded life satisfied the requirements, and helped to fill the coffers of the State. The slave class was almost the most prominent, as it was certainly the most mournful feature in the ancient society. In the view of antiquity, the slave was but an animated instrument, a mere body which chanced to be endowed with certain mental capacities. In the eye of the law, the slave was not a person: he was classed by the jurists with goods and with animals; he was sold, he was bequeathed by will, he was lent to a friend, he was shut up, he was banished, until the day of the later legislation he was killed–quite at the discretion of his owner. And St. Paul calls himself this–the slave of Jesus Christ! He was not merely a servant holding an honourable post in the kingdom of heaven, which he might relinquish at pleasure; he was consciously a slave. And in this abandonment of all human liberty at the feet of the Redeemer rain this utter surrender of the right to his intelligence, his affections, the employment of his time and his property, his movements from place to place, except as his Master might command, St. Paul found the true dignity and happiness of his being as a man. He belonged to Jesus Christ not by any original or solitary act of his own, but because, as he could not but acknowledge, Jesus Christ had paid for him, had bought him at an incalculable cost, out of slavery which was misery and degradation, into a service, which was freedom indeed. (Canon Liddon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Our duty with respect to public opinion<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Public opinion is that common stock of thought and sentiment which is created by human society, or by a particular section of it; and it in turn keeps its authors under strict control. It is a natural product, it is a deposit which cannot but result from human intercourse. No sooner do men associate with one another, than a public opinion of some kind comes to be. And as civilization advances, and man multiplies the channels whereby he ascertains and governs the thought of his fellow-men, public opinion grows in strength, in area, and men voluntarily, or rather instinctively, abandon an increasing district of their understandings and conduct to its undisputed control. It varies in definiteness and in exigency with the number of human beings which it happens to represent. There is public opinion proper to each village and town, to each society and profession, to each country, to each civilization, to the world; but between the most general and the narrowest forms of this common body of thought and sentiment, there are bands and joints which weld the whole into a substantial unit; and in modern times public opinion has taken a concrete body and form, such as two centuries ago was undreamt of. It lives, it works in the daily press. In the press we see visibly embodied before our eyes this empire of opinion, with its countless varieties and sub-divisions, with its strong, corporate, and substantial unities. And so, face to face with the press, every man who hopes to keep his own conscience in moderately good order knows that in public opinion he encounters a force with which, sooner or later, on a large scale or a small, before the world or in the recesses of his own conscience, he must of necessity reckon; and that, whether he bears like St. Paul a commission from heaven, or endeavours to be loyal to such truth as he knows of chiefly or altogether among the concerns of earth. What is the duty of the Christian towards this ubiquitous, this penetrating agency? Is he to shut himself up and despise it, as might some Stoic of the earlier Stoic school? Assuredly not. St. Paul did not do that. He was respectful, even towards heathen opinion Are we, then, to place ourselves trustfully under public opinion, to defer to and obey it, at least in a Christian country; and is it to furnish us in the last resort with the rule of conduct and criterion of moral, even religious, truth? Again, most assuredly not; for it is, in fact, a compromise between the many elements which go to make up human society; and the lower and selfish elements of thought and feeling are apt upon the whole to preponderate. Public opinion is too wanting in patience, in penetration, in delicacy, to deal successfully with religious questions. It cannot be right to cry Hosanna now; to-morrow, Crucify; to applaud in Galilee what you condemn in Jerusalem; to sanction in this generation what was denounced in that; to adore what you have burned, to burn what you have adored with conspicuous versatility, merely because a large body of human beings–the majority of them, it may be, quite without particular information on the subject in hand–love to have it so. To attempt to please men in this sense is, most assuredly, incompatible with the service of Christ. The Christian has, or ought to have, upon his heart and upon his conscience, the revelation of truth which in these great crises of life sets him above the exigencies of public opinion. He that is spiritual judgeth all things, but he himself is judged of no man. He will not, indeed, break with it lightly or wantonly; he will look ones and again, aye and a third time, to be sure that he is not himself deceived, if not in his principle yet in its application. But when this point is once clear, he will resolutely go forward. (Canon Liddon.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Uncomfortable preaching<\/strong><\/p>\n

      I remember one of my parishioners telling me that he thought a person should not go to church to be made uncomfortable. I replied that I thought so too; but whether it should be the sermon or the mans life that should be altered, so as to avoid the discomfort, must depend on whether the doctrine was right or wrong. (Archbishop Whately.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Reward of men-pleasing–<\/strong><\/p>\n

      One <\/em>Sunday afternoon a well-known minister, fatigued after his labours in church, retired to his room to rest. He had not long lain down, before he fell asleep and began to dream. He dreamed, that on walking into his garden, he entered a bower that had been erected in it, where he sat down to read and meditate. While thus employed, he thought he heard some person enter the <\/strong>garden.; and, leaving his bower, he immediately hastened towards the spot whence the sound seemed to come, in order to discover who it was that had entered. He had not proceeded far before he discovered a particular friend of his, a minister of considerable talents and popularity. On approaching his friend, he was surprised to find on his countenance a gloom which it had not been wont to bear, indicating violent agitation of mind which seemed to arise from conscious remorse. After the usual salutations had passed, his friend asked the relater the time of the day. To which he replied, Twenty.five minutes after four. On hearing this the stranger said, It is only one hour since I died, and now–(here his countenance spoke unutterable horrors.) Why so troubled? inquired the dreaming minister. It is not, said he, because I have not preached the gospel; nor is it because I have not been rendered useful, for I have now many seals to my ministry that <\/strong>can bear testimony to the truth as it is in Jesus, which they have received from my lips; but it is because I have been accumulating to myself the praise of men, more than the honour which cometh from above; and, verily, I have my reward. Having thus said, he disappeared, and was seen no more. The minister awoke, and soon learned of the death of the popular preacher at the precise time indicated in the dream.<\/p>\n

      Attempts at men-pleasing not always successful<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Dr. Dodds besetting sin seems to have been an excessive anxiety to give satisfaction to all, to please men of every shade of opinion. Having to preach one Sunday at a country town, where were two different meeting-houses, the one Calvinistic and the <\/strong>other Arminian, the doctor provided himself with two sermons as opposite in their doctrine as were the congregations he was to preach to. When he arrived at the place he mounted the Calvinistic pulpit in the morning, gave out his text, and began his sermon; but he had not proceeded far when he perceived that he had pulled out the wrong sermon. However, it was now too late to repair the mischief, so he was obliged to go through with it, much to his own discomfiture, and to the dissatisfaction of the people. Having but two sermons with him, and knowing that many of his morning hearers would follow him to the other meeting in the afternoon, he was under the necessity of preaching his Calvinistic discourse in the Arminian place of worship, and of course gave as much discontent to his second congregation as he had done to the first. The doctor mentioning his mistake shortly afterwards to an intimate friend, received sorry comfort from the reply: Never mind, sir; you only happened to put your hand into the wrong pocket!<\/p>\n

      Godless ministers<\/strong><\/p>\n

      It is true that a man may impart light to others, who does not himself see the light. It is true that, like a concave speculum, cut from a block of ice, which by its power of concentrating the rays of the sun, kindles touchwood or explodes gunpowder, a preacher may set others on fire, when his own heart is cold as frost. It is true that he may stand like a <\/strong>lifeless finger-post, pointing the way on a road where he neither leads nor follows. (T. Guthrie, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Verse 10. Do I now persuade men, or God?<\/B><\/I>] The words may be rendered to court or solicit the favour of God<\/I> as the after clause sufficiently proves. This acceptation of is very common in Greek authors. While the apostle was a persecutor of the Christians, he was the servant of men<\/I>, and pleased men<\/I>. When he embraced the Christian doctrine, he became the servant<\/I> of GOD, and pleased<\/I> HIM. He therefore intimates that he was a widely different person now from what he had been while a Jew.<\/P><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      For do I now persuade men, or God?<\/B> There is an emphasis in the particle now, <\/I>since I became a Christian, and was made an apostle; while I was a Pharisee I did otherwise, but since I became an apostle of Jesus Christ, do I persuade you to hear what men say, or what God saith? Or (as others) do I persuade the things of men, their notions and doctrines, or the things of God? Or do I in my preaching aim at the gratifying or the pleasing of men, or the pleasing of God? The last is plainly said in the next words, <\/P>

      do I seek to please men?<\/B> Which must not be understood in the full latitude of the term, but restrainedly, do I seek to please and humour men in things wherein they teach and act contrary to God? It is the duty of inferiors to please their superiors, and of all good ministers and Christians, to please their brethren, so far as may tend to the advantage of their souls; or in civil things, so as to maintain a friendly and peaceable society; but they ought not to do any thing in humour to them, by which God may be displeased. In which sense it is that the apostle adds: <\/P>

      For if I pleased men, <\/B>that is, in saying as they say, and doing as they do, without regard to pleasing or displeasing of Christ, <\/P>

      I should not<\/B> show myself <\/P>

      the servant of Christ; <\/B>for his servants we are whom we obey, and our Lord hath taught us, that no man can serve two masters, that is, commanding contrary things. <\/P> <\/p>\n

      Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      10. For<\/B>accounting for thestrong language he has just used. <\/P>

      do I now<\/B>resuming the”now” of Ga 1:9<\/span>. “AmI now<\/I> persuading men?” [ALFORD],that is, conciliating. Is what I have just now<\/I> said a sampleof men-pleasing, of which I am accused? His adversaries accused himof being an interested flatterer of men, “becoming all things toall men,” to make a party for himself, and so observing the lawamong the Jews (for instance, circumcising Timothy), yet persuadingthe Gentiles to renounce it (Ga5:11<\/span>) (in order to flatter those, really keeping them in asubordinate state, not admitted to the full privileges which thecircumcised alone enjoyed). NEANDERexplains the “now” thus: Once, when a Pharisee, I wasactuated only by a regard to human authority and to please men(Luk 16:15<\/span>; Joh 5:44<\/span>),but NOW I teach asresponsible to God alone (1Co 4:3<\/span>).<\/P>

      or God?<\/B>Regard is to behad to God alone. <\/P>

      for if I yet pleased men<\/B>Theoldest manuscripts omit “for.” “If I were stillpleasing men,” c. (Luk 6:26<\/span>Joh 15:19<\/span>; 1Th 2:4<\/span>;Jas 4:4<\/span>; 1Jn 4:5<\/span>).On “yet,” compare Ga5:11<\/span>. <\/P>

      servant of Christ<\/B>andso pleasing Him in all things (Tit 2:9<\/span>;Col 3:22<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      For do I now persuade men, or God<\/strong>?…. To “persuade”, is to teach; see Ac 18:4<\/span> the sense of which, with respect to men, is easy, but, with regard to God, difficult; and indeed cannot be applied to him, consistent with his divine perfections; and therefore something must be understood, and which may be supplied either thus, “do I now persuade”, you or others, that “men or God” are to be hearkened to? not men, but God; the apostle did not teach them to hearken either to himself, or any of the other apostles, Peter, James, and John, any further than as he and they preached the pure Gospel of Christ; but should they do otherwise, they were not to be attended to, but God, who spake by his Son; or Christ, who is God as well as man; who is the great prophet in the church, a son in his own house, whose voice is to be hearkened to in all matters of doctrine, worship, and duty: or thus, “do I now persuade” you, to obey “men or God”; not men, but God; he did not teach them to regard the traditions of the elders, or to obey the commandments of men, but, on the contrary, the ordinances of Christ, who is the one Lord, and only master, whose orders are to be observed: or thus, “do I now persuade”, to trust in “men or God?” to believe in the one or the other; not in men, in the wisdom, strength, riches, and righteousness of men, but in the living God; in the grace of God, and in the blood, righteousness, and sacrifice of Christ: or thus, “do I persuade” for the sake of “men, or God?” not for the sake of gaining honour, glory, and applause from men, as the Pharisees and false apostles did, but for the glory of God, the hour of Christ, and the good of immortal souls: or else not persons, but things are meant, by men and God: and the sense is, that the apostle taught and persuaded men to believe, not things human, but divine; he did not preach himself, or seek to set up his own power and authority over men; or set forth his eloquence, learning, parts, and abilities; or to gain either applause or riches to himself; he did not teach human wisdom, the vain philosophy of the Gentiles, and opposition of science, falsely so called; nor the traditions of the elders, nor the commandments of men; nor the power and purity human nature, or the righteousness of man: but delivered things divine; he persuaded to things concerning God, and the kingdom of God; see Ac 19:8<\/span> he taught, that without the regenerating grace of the Spirit of God, no man should see, and without the justifying righteousness of Christ, no man should enter into the kingdom of heaven, as his Lord had done before him; he preached the things concerning the grace and love of God, the person and offices of Christ, and the Spirit’s work of regeneration and sanctification: the word “now”, refers to all the time since his conversion, to the present: before his call by grace, he persuaded persons to hearken to men, to obey the traditions of the elders, to trust in their own righteousness for justification before God; but now he saw otherwise, and taught them to lay aside everything that was human, and to believe in God, trust in and depend on his justifying righteousness; and this he did, without any regard to the favour and affection of men, as appears from what follows:<\/p>\n

      or do I seek to please men<\/strong>? no, he neither pleased, nor sought to please them; neither in the matter of his ministry, which was the grace of God, salvation by a crucified Christ, and the things of the Spirit of God; for these were very distasteful to, and accounted foolishness by the men of the world; nor in the manner of it, which was not with excellency of speech, or the enticing words of man’s wisdom, with the flowers of rhetoric, but in a plain and simple style. There is indeed a pleasing of men, which is right, and which the apostle elsewhere recommends, and was in the practice of himself; see Ro 15:2<\/span>. This proceeds from right principles, by proper ways and means, and to right ends, the glory of God, the good, profit, edification, and salvation of men; and there is a pleasing of men that is wrong, which is done by dropping, concealing, or corrupting the doctrines of the Gospel, to gain the affection and applause of men, and amass wealth to themselves, as the false apostles did, and who are here tacitly struck at; a practice the apostle could by no means come into, and assigns this reason for it:<\/p>\n

      for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ<\/strong>: formerly he had studied to please men, when he held the clothes of those that stoned Stephen, made havoc of the church, hating men and women to prison; and went to the high priest, and asked letters of him to go to Damascus, and persecute the followers of Christ, thereby currying favour with him; but now it was otherwise, and he suggests, that was this his present temper and conduct he should have continued a Pharisee still, and have never entered into the service of Christ; for to please men, and be a servant of Christ, are things inconsistent, incompatible, and impracticable; no man pleaser can be a true faithful servant of Christ, or deserve the name of one: the apostle here refers to his office as an apostle of Christ, and minister of the Gospel, and not to his character as a private believer, in which sense every Christian is a servant of Christ; though to men is even contrary to this; for no man can serve two masters, God and the world, Christ and men. The Septuagint version of Ps 53:5<\/span> is, “for God hath scattered the bones”,<\/p>\n

      , “of men pleasers”, to which agree the Syriac and Arabic versions.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      The Apostle’s Integrity.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD>

      A. D.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> 56.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE>

            10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.   11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.   12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it,<\/I> but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.   13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:   14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.   15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me<\/I> by his grace,   16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:   17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.   18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.   19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.   20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.   21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;   22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Juda which were in Christ:   23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.   24 And they glorified God in me.<\/P>

            What Paul had said more generally, in the preface of this epistle, he now proceeds more particularly to enlarge upon. There he had declared himself to be an apostle of Christ; and here he comes more directly to support his claim to that character and office. There were some in the churches of Galatia who were prevailed with to call this in question; for those who preached up the ceremonial law did all they could to lessen Paul’s reputation, who preached the pure gospel of Christ to the Gentiles: and therefore he here sets himself to prove the divinity both of his mission and doctrine, that thereby he might wipe off the aspersions which his enemies had cast upon him, and recover these Christians into a better opinion of the gospel he had preached to them. This he gives sufficient evidence of,<\/P>

            I. From the scope and design of his ministry, which was not to persuade men, but God,<\/I> c. The meaning of this may be either that in his preaching the gospel he did not act in obedience to men, but God, who had called him to this work and office or that his aim therein was to bring persons to the obedience, not of men, but of God. As he professed to act by a commission from God; so that which he chiefly aimed at was to promote his glory, by recovering sinners into a state of subjection to him. And as this was the great end he was pursuing, so, agreeably hereunto, he did not seek to please men.<\/I> He did not, in his doctrine, accommodate himself to the humours of persons, either to gain their affection or to avoid their resentment; but his great care was to approve himself to God. The judaizing teachers, by whom these churches were corrupted, had discovered a very different temper; they mixed works with faith, and the law with the gospel, only to please the Jews, whom they were willing to court and keep in with, that they might escape persecution. But Paul was a man of another spirit; he was not so solicitous to please them, nor to mitigate their rage against him, as to alter the doctrine of Christ either to gain their favour or to avoid their fury. And he gives this very good reason for it, that, if he yet pleased men, he would not be the servant of Christ.<\/I> These he knew were utterly inconsistent, and that no man could serve two such masters; and therefore, though he would not needlessly displease any, yet he dared not allow himself to gratify men at the expense of his faithfulness to Christ. Thus, from the sincerity of his aims and intentions in the discharge of his office, he proves that he was truly an apostle of Christ. And from this his temper and behaviour we may note, 1. That the great end which ministers of the gospel should aim at is to bring men to God. 2. That those who are faithful will not seek to please men, but to approve themselves to God. 3. That they must not be solicitous to please men, if they would approve themselves faithful servants to Christ. But, if this argument should not be thought sufficient, he goes on to prove his apostleship,<\/P>

            II. From the manner wherein he received the gospel which he preached to them, concerning which he assures them (Gal 1:11<\/span>; Gal 1:12<\/span>) that he had it not by information from others, but by revelation from heaven. One thing peculiar in the character of an apostle was that he had been called to, and instructed for, this office immediately by Christ himself. And in this he here shows that he was by no means defective, whatever his enemies might suggest to the contrary. Ordinary ministers, as they receive their call to preach the gospel by the mediation of others, so it is by means of the instruction and assistance of others that they are brought to the knowledge of it. But Paul acquaints them that he had his knowledge of the gospel, as well as his authority to preach it, directly from the Lord Jesus: the gospel which he preached was not after man; he neither received it of man, nor was he taught it by man,<\/I> but by immediate inspiration, or revelation from Christ himself. This he was concerned to make out, to prove himself an apostle: and to this purpose,<\/P>

            1. He tells them what his education was, and what, accordingly, his conversation in time past had been, Gal 1:13<\/span>; Gal 1:14<\/span>. Particularly, he acquaints them that he had been brought up in the Jewish religion, and that he had profited in it above many his equals of his own nation<\/I>–that he had been exceedingly zealous of the traditions of the elders,<\/I> such doctrines and customs as had been invented by their fathers, and conveyed down from one generation to another; yea, to such a degree that, in his zeal for them, he had beyond measure persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.<\/I> He had not only been a rejecter of the Christian religion, notwithstanding the many evident proofs that were given of its divine origin; but he had been a persecutor of it too, and had applied himself with the utmost violence and rage to destroy the professors of it. This Paul often takes notice of, for the magnifying of that free and rich grace which had wrought so wonderful a change in him, whereby of so great a sinner he was made a sincere penitent, and from a persecutor had become an apostle. And it was very fit to mention it here; for it would hence appear that he was not led to Christianity, as many others are, purely by education, since he had been bred up in an enmity and opposition to it; and they might reasonably suppose that it must be something very extraordinary which had made so great a change in him, which had conquered the prejudices of his education, and brought him not only to profess, but to preach, that doctrine, which he had before so vehemently opposed.<\/P>

            2. In how wonderful a manner he was turned from the error of his ways, brought to the knowledge and faith of Christ, and appointed to the office of an apostle, Gal 1:15<\/span>; Gal 1:16<\/span>. This was not done in an ordinary way, nor by ordinary means, but in an extraordinary manner; for, (1.) God had separated him hereunto from his mother’s womb:<\/I> the change that was wrought in him was in pursuance of a divine purpose concerning him, whereby he was appointed to be a Christian and an apostle, before he came into the world, or had done either good or evil. (2.) he was called by his grace.<\/I> All who are savingly converted are called by the grace of God; their conversion is the effect of his good pleasure concerning them, and is effected by his power and grace in them. But there was something peculiar in the case of Paul, both in the suddenness and in the greatness of the change wrought in him, and also in the manner wherein it was effected, which was not by the mediation of others, as the instruments of it, but by Christ’s personal appearance to him, and immediate operation upon him, whereby it was rendered a more special and extraordinary instance of divine power and favour. (3.) He had Christ revealed in him.<\/I> He was not only revealed to him, but in him. It will but little avail us to have Christ revealed to us if he is not also revealed in us; but this was not the case of Paul. It pleased God to reveal his Son in him,<\/I> to bring him to the knowledge of Christ and his gospel by special and immediate revelation. And, (4.) It was with this design, that he should preach him among the heathen; not only that he should embrace him himself, but preach him to others; so that he was both a Christian and an apostle by revelation.<\/P>

            3. He acquaints them how he behaved himself hereupon, from v.<\/I><\/span> 16<\/span>, to the end. Being thus called to his work and office, he conferred not with flesh and blood.<\/I> This may be taken more generally, and so we may learn from it that, when God calls us by his grace, we must not consult flesh and blood. But the meaning of it here is that he did not consult men; he did not apply to any others for their advice and direction; neither did he go up to Jerusalem, to those that were apostles before him,<\/I> as though he needed to be approved by them, or to receive any further instructions or authority from them: but, instead of that, he steered another course, and went into Arabia,<\/I> either as a place of retirement proper for receiving further divine revelations, or in order to preach the gospel there among the Gentiles, being appointed to be the apostle of the Gentiles; and thence he returned again to Damascus,<\/I> where he had first begun his ministry, and whence he had with difficulty escaped the rage of his enemies, Acts ix<\/span>. It was not till three years after<\/I> his conversion that he went up to Jerusalem, to see Peter;<\/I> and when he did so he made but a very short stay with him, no more than fifteen days;<\/I> nor, while he was there, did he go much into conversation; for others of the apostles he saw none, but James, the Lord’s brother.<\/I> So that it could not well be pretended that he was indebted to any other either for his knowledge of the gospel or his authority to preach it; but it appeared that both his qualifications for, and his call to, the apostolic office were extraordinary and divine. This account being of importance, to establish his claim to this office, to remove the unjust censures of his adversaries, and to recover the Galatians from the impressions they had received to his prejudice, he confirms it by a solemn oath (v.<\/I><\/span> 20<\/span>), declaring, as in the presence of God, that what he had said was strictly true, and that he had not in the least falsified in what he had related, which, though it will not justify us in solemn appeals to God upon every occasion, yet shows that, in matters of weight and moment, this may sometimes not only be lawful, but duty. After this he acquaints them that he came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia:<\/I> having made this short visit to Peter, he returns to his work again. He had no communication at that time with the churches of Christ in Judea,<\/I> they had not so much as seen his face; but, having heard that he who persecuted them in times past now preached the faith which he once destroyed, they glorified God<\/I> because of him; thanksgivings were rendered by many unto God on that behalf; the very report of this mighty change in him, as it filled them with joy, so it excited them to give glory to God on the account of it.<\/P><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Am I persuading? <\/B> (?<\/SPAN><\/span>). Conative present, trying to persuade like <\/SPAN><\/span> (seeking to please) where the effort is stated plainly. See 2Co 5:11<\/span>.<\/P>

      I should not be <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Conclusion of second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Regular construction here (<\/SPAN><\/span> and imperfect indicative in the condition , <\/SPAN><\/span> and imperfect in the conclusion). About pleasing men see on 1Th 2:4<\/span>. In Col 3:22<\/span>; Col 6:6<\/span> Paul uses the word “men-pleasers” (<\/SPAN><\/span>). <\/P> <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      For do I now persuade [ – ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. For introduces a justification of the severe language just used. The emphasis is on now, which answers to now in verse 9. I have been charged with conciliating men. Does this anathema of mine look like it? Is it a time for conciliatory words now, when Judaising emissaries are troubling you (verse 7) and persuading you to forsake the true gospel ? Persuade signifies conciliate, seek to win over. <\/P>

      Or God. Persuade or conciliate God is an awkward phrase; but the expression is condensed, and persuade is carried forward from the previous clause. This is not uncommon in Paul ‘s style : See Phl 1:5<\/span>; Eph 1:15<\/span>; Phi 2:6<\/span>, where morfh form, applied to God, is probably the result of morfhn doulou form of a servant (verse 7) on which the main stress of the thought lies.<\/P> <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      <\/strong><\/p>\n

      PAUL’S GOSPEL A REVELATION, NOT A TRADITION<\/p>\n

      <\/strong><\/p>\n

      1) “For do I now persuade men, or God?”<\/strong> (arti gar anthropous peitho he ton theon) “For at this moment (now) do I please men or God?” The idea is “am I courting the favor of men, or do I seek the favor of God?” The latter was his objective, 1Th 2:4<\/span>. He, like John, sought always to do the things pleasing in the sight of God, Joh 3:22<\/span>.<\/p>\n

      2) “Or do I seek to please men?”<\/strong> (e zeto anthropois ereskon) “or do I seek (go out of my way) to please men?” as a priority of my motives; the answer is that he did not, 1Th 2:5-6<\/span>; nor did he teach others to conduct themselves in such a manner, Eph 6:6<\/span>; Col 3:22<\/span>. Each should daily ask “whom should I seek first to please?”<\/p>\n

      3) “For if I yet pleased men,”<\/strong> (ei eti anthropois ereskon) “If (indeed) I still pleased men,” If this were my prime motive, the love of God would not be in my heart, 1Jn 2:15-16<\/span>; Rom 8:7<\/span> asserts that those “in the flesh,” concerned with it as a priority of life and affections, “cannot please God.” See also Jas 4:4<\/span>.<\/p>\n

      4) “I should not be the servant of Christ,”<\/strong> (Christou doulous ouk an emen) “I would not have been a servant of Christ,” while doing so. For no man can serve the will of two masters with equal devotion or loyalty, Mat 6:24<\/span>; Luk 16:13-15<\/span>. For that which “highly esteemed among men is an abomination to God.”<\/p>\n

      The Rev Joseph Alleine was very faithful and impartial in administering reproof. Once when employed in a work of this kind, he said to a Christian friend, “I am now going about that which is likely to make a very dear and obliging friend become an enemy. But, however, it cannot be omitted; it is better to lose man’s favor than God’s.” But, so far from becoming his enemy for his conscientious faithfulness to him, he rather loved him the more ever after, as long as he lived.<\/p>\n

      -Gray-Adams<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Having extolled so confidently his own preaching, he now shows that this was no idle or empty boast. He supports his assertion by two arguments. The first is, that he was not prompted by ambition, or flattery, or any similar passion, to accommodate himself to the views of men. The second and far stronger argument is, that he was not the author of the gospel, but delivered faithfully what he had received from God. <\/p>\n

      10. For do I now persuade according to men or according to God? The ambiguity of the Greek construction in this passage, has given rise to a variety of expositions. Some render it, Do I now persuade men or God? (25) Others interpret the words “God” and “men,” as meaning divine and human concerns. This sense would agree very well with the context, if it were not too wide a departure from the words. The view which I have preferred is more natural; for nothing is more common with the Greeks than to leave the preposition κατὰ, according to, to be understood. <\/p>\n

      Paul is speaking, not about the subject of his preaching, but about the purpose of his own mind, which could not refer so properly to men as to God. The disposition of the speaker, it must be owned, may have some influence on his doctrine. As corruption of doctrine springs from ambition, avarice, or any other sinful passion, so the truth is maintained in its purity by an upright conscience. And so he contends that his doctrine is sound, because it is not modified so as to gratify men. <\/p>\n

      Or, do I seek to please men? This second clause differs not much, and yet it differs somewhat from the former; for the desire of obtaining favor is one motive for speaking “according to men.” When there reigns in our hearts such ambition, that we desire to regulate our discourse so as to obtain the favor of men, our instructions cannot be sincere. Paul therefore declares, that he is in no degree chargeable with this vice; and, the more boldly to repel the calumnious insinuation, he employs the interrogative form of speech; for interrogations carry the greater weight, when our opponents are allowed an opportunity of replying, if they have anything to say. This expresses the great boldness which Paul derived from the testimony of a good conscience; for he knew that he had discharged his duty in such a manner as not to be liable to any reproach of that kind. (Act 23:1<\/span>; 2Co 1:12<\/span>.) <\/p>\n

      If I yet pleased men This is a remarkable sentiment; that ambitious persons, that is, those who hunt after the applause of men, cannot serve Christ. He declares for himself, that he had freely renounced the estimation of men, in order to devote himself entirely to the service of Christ; and, in this respect, he contrasts his present position with that which he occupied at a former period of life. He had been regarded with the highest esteem, had received from every quarter loud applause; and, therefore, if he had chosen to please men, he would not have found it necessary to change his condition. But we may draw from it the general doctrine which I have stated, that those who resolve to serve Christ faithfully, must have boldness to despise the favor of men. <\/p>\n

      The word men is here employed in a limited sense; for the ministers of Christ ought not to labor for the express purpose of displeasing men. But there are various classes of men. Those to whom Christ “is precious,” (1Pe 2:7<\/span>,) are men whom we should endeavor to please in Christ; while they who choose that the true doctrine shall give place to their own passions, are men to whom we must give no countenance. And godly, upright pastors, will always find it necessary to contend with the offenses of those who choose that, on all points, their own wishes shall be gratified; for the Church will always contain hypocrites and wicked men, by whom their own lusts will be preferred to the word of God. And even good men, either through ignorance, or through weak prejudice, are sometimes tempted by the devil to be displeased with the faithful warnings of their pastor. Our duty, therefore, is not to take alarm at any kind of offenses, provided, at the same time, that we do not excite in weak minds a prejudice against Christ himself. <\/p>\n

      Many interpret this passage in a different manner, as implying an admission to the following effect: “If I pleased men, then I should not be the servant of Christ. I own it, but who shall bring such a charge against me? Who does not see that I do not court the favor of men?” But I prefer the former view, that Paul is relating how large an amount of the estimation of men he had relinquished, in order to devote himself to the service of Christ. <\/p>\n

      (25) “ Πείθω. This word, which we render persuade, frequently signifies ‘to obtain by treaty,’ or, ‘to endeavor the friendship and good will of any person.’ Thus in Mat 28:14<\/span>, the chief-priests tell the soldiers, whom they corrupted, to give a false report: ‘If this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you, that is, prevail with him to be favorable to you, and save you from punishment.’ Thus, Act 12:20<\/span>, πείσαντες Βλάστον, we render, ‘having made Blastus their friend.’ Vid. Pind. Ol. 3:28. And in the Apocryphal book of Maccabees, (2Ma 4:45<\/span>,) when Menelaus found himself convicted of his crimes, he promised Ptolemy a large sum of money, πεῖσαι τὸν βασιλέα, ‘to pacify the king,’ to prevent his displeasure, and secure his favor. And thus, in the place before us, ‘to persuade God,’ is to endeavor to secure his approbation; which, the Apostle assures the Galatians, was his great and only view, as well as his great support, under the censure and displeasure of men, for preaching the pure and uncorrupted doctrines of the gospel.” — Chandler. <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES<\/em><\/p>\n

      Gal. 1:11<\/span>. Not after man.<\/strong>Not according to man; not influenced by mere human considerations, as it would be if it were of human origin.<\/p>\n

      Gal. 1:12<\/span>. But by the revelation of Jesus Christ.<\/strong>Probably this took place during the three years, in part of which the apostle sojourned in Arabia (Gal. 1:17-18<\/span>), in the vicinity of the scene of the giving of the law: a fit place for such a revelation of the gospel of grace which supersedes the ceremonial law. Though he had received no instruction from the apostles, but from the Holy Ghost, yet when he met them his gospel exactly agreed with theirs.<\/p>\n

      MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.<\/em>Gal. 1:10-12<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

      The Superhuman Origin of the Gospel<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      I. The gospel is not constructed on human principles.<\/strong>But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man (Gal. 1:11<\/span>). Its character is such as the human mind would never have conceived. When it was first proclaimed it was the puzzle of the religious and the ridicule of the learnedunto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness. It is wholly opposed to the drift of human tendencies. Its supreme aim is to effect a complete transformation of human nature. Not to destroy that nature, but to renew, elevate, and sublimate it. By its principle of self-sacrificing love, its insistence of the essential oneness of the race, its methods in dealing with the worlds evils, its lofty morality, and its uncompromising claims of superiority the gospel transcends all the efforts of human ingenuity. Augustine, the father of Western theology in the fifth century, divided the human race into two classesthe one who lived according to man and the other who lived according to God. The gospel is the only revelation that teaches men how to live according to God.<\/p>\n

      II. The gospel does not pander to human tastes.<\/strong>For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ (Gal. 1:10<\/span>). The adversaries of the apostle insinuated that he was a trimmer, observing the law among the Jews and yet persuading the Gentiles to renounce it; becoming all things to all men that he might form a party of his own. Such an insinuation was based on an utter misconception of the gospel. So far from flattering, Paul preached a gospel that humbled men, demanding repentance and reform. It often came in collision with popular tastes and opinions; and though the apostle was a man of broad views and sympathies, he was ever the faithful and uncompromising servant of Christ. Public opinion may be hugely mistaken, and there is danger of over-estimating its importance. It is the lofty function of the preacher to create a healthy public opinion and Christianise it, and he can do this only by a scrupulous and constant representation of the mind of Christ, his divine Master. The wise Phocion was so sensible how dangerous it was to be touched with what the multitude approved that upon a general acclamation made when he was making an oration he turned to an intelligent friend and asked in a surprised manner, What slip have I made? George Macdonald once said, When one has learned to seek the honour that cometh from God only, he will take the withholding of the honour that cometh by man very lightly indeed.<\/p>\n

      III. The gospel has a distinctly superhuman origin.<\/strong>For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:12<\/span>). Pauls reception of the gospel was not only a revelation of Christ to<\/em> him, but at the same time a revelation of Christ in<\/em> him. The human vehicle was spiritually prepared for the reception and understanding of the divine message; and this moral transformation not only convinced him of the superhuman character of the gospel, but also empowered him with authority to declare it. The gospel carries with it the self-evidencing force of its divine origin in its effect upon both preacher and hearer. It is still an enigma to the mere intellectual student; only as it is received into the inmost soul, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, is its true nature apprehended and enjoyed.<\/p>\n

      Lessons.<\/strong><\/p>\n

      1. Man everywhere is in dire need of the gospel<\/em>. <\/p>\n

      2. The human mind is incapable of constructing a saving gospel<\/em>. <\/p>\n

      3. The gospel is inefficacious till it is received as a divine gift<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES<\/em><\/p>\n

      Gal. 1:10<\/span>. Fidelity in the Ministry<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      I. The proper nature of the ministry is not the word or doctrine of man but of God.<\/strong>Ministers are taught to handle their doctrine with modesty and humility, without ostentation, with reverence, and with a consideration of the majesty of God, whose doctrine it is they utter<\/p>\n

      II. The dispensing of the word must not be for the pleasing of men but God.<\/strong>Ministers must not apply and fashion their doctrine to the affections, humours, and dispositions of men, but keep a good conscience and do their office.<\/p>\n

      III. If we seek to please men we cannot be the servants of God.<\/strong>He that would be a faithful minister of the gospel must deny the pride of his heart, be emptied of ambition, and set himself wholly to seek the glory of God in his calling.Perkins<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      The Servant of Christ<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      I. There is nothing dishonourable in the idea of a servant absolutely considered.<\/strong>On the contrary, there may be much in it that is noble and venerable. Nothing can be more contemptible than an affectation of independence which resents or is ashamed of a servants name. And many who despise servants should be told that they themselves are so worthless that nobody would think of honouring them with hiring them for service. It was Christs honour that His Father so employed Him for the work of our salvation, and said, Behold My Servant, whom I have chosen; and the highest honour of the preachers of the gospel is that they are the ministers, that is, the servants, both of Christ and His Church. There are cases, no doubt, in which servitude is degrading. The master may be infamous; though even then the servants condition is not dishonourable, unless he be employed in infamous work. Many servants have wrought out most honourable names for themselves in doing good work under bad masters. Matthew Henry has said well that there is nothing mean but sin, and with such meanness and dishonour is every man affected who is not a servant of Christ. There is for us all the choice of only two conditions; there is not a third and neutral one. The alternative is a servant of the Son of God or a slave of sin. It may not be of sin in its most hideous forms, in the form in which it tyrannises over the drunkard, the lewd man, or the ambitious, but even in its milder and less-offensive form, when it may reign only with the power which it exercises over the worshipper of wealth or of human applause; still, it is a degrading vassalage. Let no worldly man, then, affect to pity or scorn the disciple of the gospel as being one whom superstition enslaves, though it were admitted to be a slavery; he himself labours under one infinitely more oppressive and degrading. Whose appears the greater liberty and the least oppression, his who is governed by the salutary laws of the gospel, or his who is the sport and victim of his own ignorance and passions, or of the opinion of the world, to which, at the expense of the violation of his own conscience, he feels himself compelled ignominiously to submit? The question needs not an answer. There is everything honourable in the one service, everything dishonourable in the other. Only that man is truly a free man who is a servant of Christ.<\/p>\n

      II. The servant of Christ.<\/strong>Others profess that they are servants of God; the Christian replies that he is a servant of Christ. There is perhaps nothing by which his faith is more distinctly characterised than this. Is he not, then, a servant of God? some one may ask, either in the spirit of a scorning objector or in that of an astonished inquirer who is as yet ignorant of the beautiful mystery of Christian salvation. When others profess that they are the servants of God, and when the Christian replies that he is a servant of Christ, does it signify that he is not a servant of the eternal Father? Such is the question; and our reply is, that in serving Christ he approves himself not only the best servant of God, but the only one whose service is genuine. In serving Christ he serves God, because God has so appointed and ordained. He has ordained that we be the servants of His Son; and if we serve not His Son, then we resist His ordination, so that we serve neither His Son nor Himself.<\/p>\n

      III. The Christian is Christs servant, not by hire, but by purchase.<\/strong>This is a circumstance which claims our most thoughtful consideration. In the case of a servant who is hired there is a limitation of the masters right, by the terms of the agreement, in respect of the kind and amount of labour to be exacted. There is also a definite term, at the expiry of which the right of service ceases, and the remuneration of the service is exigible by law. There is a vast difference in the case of a purchased servant, or, as otherwise expressed, a slave. He is his masters property, to be treated entirely according to his masters discretion. There is no limitation either to the amount or nature of the work which he may exact. The period of service is for life, and no remuneration can be claimed for the labour, howsoever heavy and protracted. Our servant-condition in relation to Christ is of this character: He does not hire us, but has purchased uspurchased us by His blood, and made us His property, to be used according to His sovereign will. But this is far from being all. Our gracious Master often sinks, as it were, the consideration of His past servicesof His humiliation, His privation, His wounds and agony by which he saved us from punishment and woeand reasons and deals with us as if we were hired servants and could merit something at His hand, animating us in our work by exhibiting to our hope that crown of glory which He will confer on all who are faithful unto death. Blessed servitudethe servitude of the Christian! Servitude of peace! Servitude of honour! Servitude of liberty! Servitude of victory and everlasting glory! <\/p>\n

      1. The Christian, as a servant, submits his mind to the authority of Christ<\/em>submits it to Him in respect of his opinions; at the utterance of His word renounces its own judgments and prejudices, and turns away from the teaching of the worlds philosophy and priesthood in scorn, saying, You have no part in me. Christ is the Lord of my conscience; I will listen to Him. <\/p>\n

      2. As the servant of Christ, the Christian subjects his body to His control and regulation<\/em> in the gratifying of its appetites, and in providing for its comfort and adornment; his lips in what they speak; his hands in what they do; his ears in what they listen to; his eyes in what they read and look at; and his feet in all their journeyings and movements. <\/p>\n

      3. As the servant of Christ, he regulates his family according to his Masters mind and law<\/em>. <\/p>\n

      4. As a servant of Christ, he conducts his business according to Christs law<\/em>, with the strictest honesty, and for Christs end, distributing his profits in a proportionI shall say a large proportion; nay, I shall say a very large proportionto the maintenance and education of his family, and some provision of an inheritance for them, and even a considerable proportion for the gratification of his own tastes. Is not that a large allowance for a slave? But oh, some of you! you seize on allwickedly appropriate all to yourselves, or part, and that with a grudge, a murmur, and a scowl, with but the smallest fraction to the Masters poor and the Masters Church! Slaves indeed! Slaves of Avarice and his daughter, Cruelty! <\/p>\n

      5. As a servant of Christ, the country of the Christian is Christs<\/em>, to be regulated, so far as his influence and vote may extend, by Christs rule, for Christs ends.W. Anderson, LL. D.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Gal. 1:11-12<\/span>. The Gospel and the Call to preach it<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      I. It is necessary that men should be assured and certified that the doctrine of the gospel and the Scripture is not of man but of God.<\/strong>That the Scripture is the word of God there are two testimonies. <\/p>\n

      1. One is the evidence of Gods Spirit imprinted and expressed in the Scriptures, and this is an excellence of the word of God above all words and writings of men and angels.
      2. The second testimony is from the prophets and apostles, who were ambassadors of God extraordinarily to represent His authority unto His Church, and the penmen of the Holy Ghost to set down the true and proper word of God.<\/p>\n

      II. It is necessary that men should be assured in their consciences that the calling and authority of their teachers are of God.<\/strong>To call men to the ministry and dispensation of the gospel belongs to Christ, who alone giveth the power, the will, the deed; and the Church can do no more than testify, publish, and declare whom God calleth.<\/p>\n

      III. The gospel which Paul preached was not human<\/strong>he did not receive it, neither was he taught it by man; and preached it not by human but by divine authority. <\/p>\n

      1. Christ is the great prophet and doctor of the Church. His office is:
      (1) To manifest and reveal the will of the Father touching the redemption of mankind.
      (2) To institute the ministry of the word and to call and send ministers.
      (3) To teach the heart within by illuminating the mind and by working a faith of the doctrine taught.
      2. There are two ways whereby Christ teaches those who are to be teachers.
      (1) By immediate revelation.
      (2) By ordinary instruction in schools by the means and ministry of men.<\/p>\n

      IV. They who are to be teachers must first be taught<\/strong>, and they must teach that which they have first learned themselves. They are first to be taught, and that by men where revelation is wanting. This is the foundation of the schools of the prophets. All men should pray that God would prosper and bless all schools of learning where this kind of teaching is in use.Perkins<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      The Gospel a Divine Revelation<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      I. It is not constructed by human ingenuity.<\/strong>The gospel which was preached of me is not after man (Gal. 1:11<\/span>).<\/p>\n

      II. It derives no authority from man.<\/strong>For I neither received it of man (Gal. 1:12<\/span>).<\/p>\n

      III. It is not acquired by mere mental culture.<\/strong>Neither was I taught it.<\/p>\n

      IV. It is a direct and special revelation from heaven.<\/strong>But by the revelation of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n

      Apostolic Assurance of the Supernatural Character of the Gospel<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      1. It is the custom of the adversaries of the truth, when they have nothing to say in reason against the doctrine itself, to cast reproach on those who preach it, and to question their call and authority to preach, that so they may indirectly at least reflect upon the doctrine.
      2. As none may take upon him to dispense the word of God publicly unto others without a call from God, so there are several sorts of callings: one of men and ordinary when God calls by the voices and consent of men; another of God and extraordinary, the call of the Church not intervening.
      3. It is required of an apostle to have the infallible knowledge of the truth of the gospel, and this not wholly by the help of human means, as we learn at schools and by private study, but mainly by immediate inspiration from the Spirit of God. Paul shows that the gospel was not taught him of man; and this he saith, not to depress human learning, but that he may obviate the calumny of his adversaries who alleged he bad the knowledge of the gospel by ordinary instruction from men only, and so was no apostle.Fergusson<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      (10) You may take this vehemence of language as my answer to another charge that has been brought against me. I am accused of seeking popularity with men. Well, here at least is plainness of speech. If I seek to win favour with any one it is not with men, but God. The two things are really incompatible. If I were a. favourite with men I should be no true servant of Christ.
      St. Paul naturally laid himself open to the charge of men-pleasing by the flexibility and largeness of his character. The trifles about which others quarrelled he could look upon with indifference, and his ready power of sympathy led him to enter as much as possible into the point of view of others: To the Jews he became as a Jew,<\/em> &c. But where a question of principle was at stake he knew how to take his stand, and he let the Galatians see it in the very unequivocal language he is now using.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      (10) Now.<\/strong>In speaking thus.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Persuade.<\/strong>Conciliate, seek to win favour with,<\/em> or to make friends of.<\/em><\/p>\n

      For.<\/strong>This word is omitted by all the best MSS. and editors. It is characteristic of the Apostle, especially in animated passages like the present, to omit the connecting particles which are so common in Greek. He has a simple answer to give to the accusation of time-serving, and he states it roundly: If my present conduct was really that of a man-pleaser I should be something very different from what I am.<\/p>\n

      Yet.<\/strong>Still; at this late period of my career.<\/em> The Apostle has cut himself adrift from the current of his age too thoroughly and too long for him to be still floating with the tide.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      10<\/strong>. <\/strong> For<\/strong> The apostle seems almost to recoil from his own repeated fulminations. Shocked, are you, at my anathemas? My purpose is not now <\/strong> to persuade men<\/strong>, but to persuade God <\/strong> himself, that I am dealing faithfully with men. <\/p>\n

      Do I now<\/strong> Is it the business I <\/strong> am now <\/strong> engaged in? Am I a human flatterer? My accursed<\/strong>, will show that I do not flatter you.<\/p>\n

      Or God<\/strong> Is not my very readiness to sacrifice your good graces proof that I am true to <\/p>\n

      God? If pleased men not of Christ<\/strong> The crisis is now arrived in which pleasing men and serving Christ are incompatible. And you know which is my choice.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      ‘For am I now persuading men or God? Or am I seeking to please men? If I were still pleasing men I would not be the servant of Christ.’<\/p>\n

      So he asks them. Do they think that by what he says he is trying to persuade God to see things as he sees them? No. Far from it. It was rather God Who had persuaded him, in spite of his own reluctance to see the truth. Nor is he seeking to persuade men, or please them. He leaves that to God. Rather He is declaring what God revealed to him, something which he himself originally fought against for some time. Indeed God had had to turn his beliefs upside down. They should thus be able to tell from this that his aim is not to make men pleased by fitting in with their ideas. Indeed, were he to do so, He would not be being faithful to his Master. For what pleased them was often contrary to the purpose for which He came. Jesus came to replace the old ideas with the new. To turn ‘water’ into ‘wine’. And that is what Paul also is seeking to do. His sole aim is to please Christ, not to satisfy men with mere water.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Do I now persuade men,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Do I court the favour of men;<\/em>or, Do I ingratiate myself with men, rather than with God? <\/em>The words now <\/em>and yet <\/em>cannot be understood without a reference to something in St. Paul’s past life. What that was which he had particularly then in his mind, we may see by the account he gives of himself in what immediately follows; namely, that before his conversion he was employed by men <\/em>in their designs, and made it his business to please them, <\/em>as may be seen Act 9:1-2<\/span>. But when GOD called him, he received his commission and instructions from him alone, and immediately entered upon his office, without consulting any man whatever; preaching that, and that only, which he had received from Christ; so that it would be senseless folly in him, and no less than the forsaking his Master Jesus Christ, if he should now, <\/em>as was reported of him, mix any thing of man’s <\/em>with the pure doctrine of the Gospel, (which he had received immediately by revelation from Jesus Christ,) to please the Jews, after he had so long preached only that; and, to avoid all appearance or pretence of the contrary, had so carefully shunned all communication with thechurches of Judea; and had not, till a good while after his conversion, and then very sparingly, conversed with any, and those but a few, of the Apostles themselves, one of whom he openly reproved for Judaizing. This is a plain assertion of the divinity of the doctrine which he had preached. The word , translated persuade, <\/em>is sometimes used for making application to any one to obtain his good will or friendship. Hence, Act 12:20<\/span> the words , are translated, having made Blastus their friend. <\/em>See 1Th 2:4<\/span>. <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/span> . Paul feels that the curse which he had just repeated twice might strike his readers as being repulsive and stern; and in reference thereto he now gives an explanatory justification<\/em> ( ) of the harsh language. He would not have uttered that , if he had been concerned at present to influence men in his favour, and not God, etc.<\/p>\n

      ] has the chief emphasis, corresponds to the in Gal 1:9<\/span> , and is therefore to be understood, not, as it usually is (and by Wieseler also), in the wider sense of the period of the apostle’s Christian life generally<\/em> , but (so Bengel, de Wette, Ellicott) in reference to the present moment<\/em> , as in Gal 1:9<\/span> , just as always in the N.T., corresponding to the Greek usage of the word, expresses the narrower idea modo, nunc ipsum<\/em> , but does not represent the wider sense of (Gal 2:20<\/span> ; 2Co 5:16<\/span> ; Mat 26:53<\/span> , et al<\/em> .), which is not even the case in the passages in Lobeck, p. 20. Hence, often as in Paul’s writings covers the whole period from his conversion, is never used in this sense, not even in 1Co 13:12<\/span> . The latter rather singles out from the more general compass of the the present moment specially, as in the classical combination (Plat. Polit<\/em> . p. 291 B, Men<\/em> . p. 85 C). Now<\/em> , Paul would say, just now<\/em> , when he is induced to write this letter by the Judaizing reaction against the very essence of the true and sole gospel which he upheld, now<\/em> , at this critical point of time it could not possibly be his business to conciliate men, but God only. Comp. Hofmann.<\/p>\n

      ] is quite general<\/em> , and is not to be restricted either to his opponents<\/em> (Hofmann) or otherwise. The category, which is pointed at, is negatived, and thus the generic . needed no article (Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep<\/em> . p. 619. 13; Sauppe, ad Xen. Mem<\/em> . i. 4, 14).<\/p>\n

      ] persuadeo<\/em> , whether by words or otherwise. The word never has any other signification;<\/em> but the more precise definition of its meaning<\/em> results from the context. Here, where that which was repulsive in the preceding curse is to receive explanation, and the parallel is , and where also the words must fit in with the idea of , it denotes, as often in classical authors (Ngelsbach zur Ilias<\/em> . i. 100), to win over, to conciliate and render friendly to oneself<\/em> (Act 12:20<\/span> , and Kypke thereon). Comp. especially on , Pind. Ol<\/em> . ii. 144; Plat. Pol<\/em> . iii. p. 390 E, ii. p. 364 C; Eur. Med<\/em> . 964; also the passages from Josephus in Krebs. Lastly, the present<\/em> tense expresses, I am occupied with it, I make it my business<\/em> . See Bernhardy, p. 370. Our explanation of substantially agrees with that of Chrysostom, Theophylact, Flacius, Hammond, Grotius, Elsner, Cornelius a Lapide, Estius, Wolf, Zachariae, Morus, Koppe, and others; also Borger, Flatt, Winer, Rckert, Usteri, Matthies, Schott, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette, Ewald (who, however, restricts the reference of , which there is nothing to limit, to the day of judgment), Wieseler, Hofmann, Reithmayr, and others. The interpretations which differ from this, such as “ humana suadeo<\/em> or doceo, an divina<\/em> ” (Erasmus, Luther, Beza, Vatablus, Gomarus, Cramer, Michaelis); or “ suadeone secundum homines an secundum Deum<\/em> ,” thus expressing the intention<\/em> and not the contents (Calvin); or “ suadeone vobis, ut hominibus credatis an ut Deo<\/em> ” (Piscator, Pareus, Calixtus; so also in substance, Holsten, z. Evang. d. Paul. u. Petr<\/em> . p. 332 ff., and Hilgenfeld), are contrary to the meaning of the word: for always means persuadere alicui<\/em> , and is not to be identified with (Act 19:8<\/span> ; Act 28:23<\/span> ), placing the personal accusative under the point of view of the thing.<\/p>\n

      ] or do I strive to be an object of human<\/em> goodwill? not tautological, but more general than the preceding. The stress which lies on makes any saving clause on the part of expositors (as, for example, Schott, “de ejusmodi cogitari studio hominibus placendi, quod Deo displiceat<\/em> ”) appear unsuitable. Even by his winning accommodation (1Co 9:19<\/span> ff; 1Co 10:15<\/span> ) Paul sought not at all to please men<\/em> , but rather God<\/em> . Comp. 1Th 2:4<\/span> .<\/p>\n

      . . .] contains the negative answer to the last question. The emphasis is placed first on , and next on : “ If I still pleased men<\/em> , if I were not already beyond the possession of human<\/em> favour, but were still well-pleasing to men, I should not be Christ’s servant<\/em> .” According to de Wette, is intended to affirm nothing more than that, if the one existed, the other could no longer exist. But in this case must logically have been placed after . The truth<\/em> of the proposition, . . ., in which . is not any more than before to be limited to Paul’s opponents<\/em> (according to Holsten, even including the apostles at Jerusalem), rests upon the principle that no one can serve two masters (Mat 6:24<\/span> ), and corresponds to the of the Lord Himself (Luk 6:26<\/span> ), and to His own precedent (Joh 6:41<\/span> ). But how decidedly, even at that period of the development of his apostolic consciousness, Paul had the full and clear conviction that he was an object, not of human goodwill, but of human hatred and calumny, is specially evident from the Epistles to the Corinthians composed soon afterwards; comp., however, even 1Th 2:4<\/span> ff. In this he recognised a mark of the servant of God and Christ (2Co 6:4<\/span> ff; 2Co 11:23<\/span> ff.; 1Co 4:9<\/span> ). The is the result<\/em> of , and consequently means to please<\/em> men, not to seek to please<\/em> or to live to please<\/em> them, as most expositors, even Rckert, Usteri, Schott, Baumgarten-Crusius, [22] quite arbitrarily assume, although apart from the context the words might<\/em> have this meaning; see on 1Co 10:33<\/span> ; and comp. , Eph 6:6<\/span><\/p>\n

      <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> ] is understood by most expositors, following Chrysostom, including Koppe, Rosenmller, Flatt, Paulus, Schott, Rckert, “so should I now be no apostle, but I should have remained a Jew, Pharisee, and persecutor of Christians;” taking, therefore, <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> in an historical<\/em> sense. But how feeble this idea would be, and how lacking the usual depth of the apostle’s thought! No; is to be taken in its ethical<\/em> character (Erasmus, Grotius, Bengel, Semler, Zachariae, Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette, Ewald, Wieseler, and others): “Were I still well-pleasing to men, this would exclude the character of a servant of Christ, and I should not be such an one; whom men misunderstand, hate, persecute, revile.” As to the relation, however, of our passage to 1Co 10:32<\/span> , see Calovius, who justly remarks that in the latter passage the is meant secundum Deum et ad hominum aedificationem<\/em> , and not secundum auram et voluntatem nudam hominum<\/em> .<\/p>\n

      [22] To live to please, to render oneself pleasing<\/em> , is also Wieseler’s interpretation (comp. also Rom 15:1<\/span> ), who consistently understands the previous in the same way. Comp. Winer and Hofmann. But there would thus be no motive for the change from to only, which according to our view involves a very significant progress. Paul seeks<\/em> not to please, and pleases<\/em> not.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      DISCOURSE: 2051
      MEN-PLEASERS REPROVED<\/strong><\/p>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/span>. Do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ<\/em>.<\/p>\n

      IN the Churches of Galatia, great efforts were made, by Judaizing teachers, to pervert the Gospel of Christ, and to establish in its place a doctrine more congenial with Jewish prejudices and Jewish habits. St. Paul set himself vigorously to withstand their influence, and to maintain the Gospel in all its purity. For this end, he declared, in this epistle, his full authority from God to require from all of them a submission to the doctrines which he preached; and he denounced a curse on any creature, whether man or angel, who should attempt to introduce any other Gospel. In prosecution of his argument, he appeals to the Galatians themselves, whether he was, or could be, actuated by any unworthy desire of pleasing men: Do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? In explanation of these words, some would supply an ellipsis here, as though he had said, Do I persuade (preach) the things of<\/em> men, or of God [Note: Dei appellatione intelligit: et idem declarat atque . Beza in loc.]? Others would translate it, Do I solicit the favour<\/em> of men or of God [Note: Doddridge on the place.]? But neither of these interpretations can I altogether approve. The former is that which our translators seem to have acquiesced in; though, father than express it, they have left the passage altogether unintelligible. But if the word which we render persuade<\/em> were translated obey<\/em> (as it is translated in other parts of this very epistle [Note: Gal 3:1<\/span>; Gal 5:7<\/span>.]), I conceive that the sense would be more clear. Let it be remembered, that the Apostle, previously to his conversion, had sought to please men, and, under their authority<\/em>, had opposed to the uttermost the cause of Christ [Note: Act 9:1-2<\/span>.]. Now he laboured, with no less zeal, to maintain that cause; and denounced a curse, even against an angel from heaven, if one should be found presumptuous enough to oppose it. But was he now<\/em> actuated by the same motives as he was before?<\/em> Did he now act under the authority of men<\/em>, or seek to please men?<\/em> Was he not rather acting in obedience to God?<\/em> It was clear that he was not pleasing men, nor could possibly have any such object in view; because mens wishes were in direct opposition to Gods commands, and to the ministrations which he felt it his duty to maintain: and if he would please and obey man, he could not be the servant of Christ.<\/p>\n

      That this is the real meaning of the passage appears, both from the terms which are used, and from the relation which the different parts of this verse bear to each other. The Apostle says, Do I now<\/em> obey man [Note: , at this present time.]? I did formerly; but I do not now:<\/em> for if I yet<\/em> [Note: .] pleased man, I could not be the servant of Christ. Here, you will perceive, the two services are opposed to each other, and declared to be inconsistent with each other [Note: is put in opposition to .]. And this not only makes the sense clear, but cuts off all occasion for supplying an ellipsis, in a way which one would not wish, and which, in my opinion, can scarcely be justified. As to the text itself, that, in its import at least, is perfectly intelligible: and, in opening it, I shall,<\/p>\n

      I.<\/p>\n

      Confirm the Apostles assertion<\/p>\n

      We shall have no doubt of its truth, if we consider the grounds on which it stands:<\/p>\n

      1.<\/p>\n

      The things which men, and the Lord Jesus Christ, require, are directly contrary to each other<\/p>\n

      [Men have their maxims and habits, to which they wish all others to be conformed. Our blessed Lord, on the contrary, says, Be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds, that ye may know what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God [Note: Rom 12:2<\/span>.]. But this is not all: he commands us, not only to have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but also rather to reprove them [Note: Eph 5:11<\/span>.]. Now, the separation alone is, of itself, sufficently displeasing to the world, because it forms a tacit reprehension of their ways: but, when to this is added a testimony borne against their ways as evil, they are irritated and incensed; and, in self-defence<\/em>, they brand their opponents with every term of ignominy and reproach. Our blessed Lord found it so with respect to himself: The world cannot hate you, said he to his unbelieving brethren; but me it hateth, because I testify of it that the works thereof are evil [Note: Joh 7:7<\/span>.]. And he has taught us to expect the same treatment on precisely the same ground: If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you [Note: Joh 15:19<\/span>.].]<\/p>\n

      2.<\/p>\n

      There is no possibility of reconciling them<\/p>\n

      [Our blessed Lord has placed this beyond a doubt: No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon [Note: Mat 6:24<\/span>.]. This is the very foundation of that separation from the world, which is the bounden duty of every one that calls himself a servant of Christ. What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? Wherefore<\/em> come out from among them, and he ye separate, saith the Lord [Note: 2Co 6:14-17<\/span>.]. In truth, this is nothing but what must commend itself to every considerate mind. St. Paul appealed respecting it to the whole Church of Rome, and, in fact, to the whole world: Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey [Note: Rom 6:16<\/span>.]? It may be said, perhaps, that the services of God and Mammon are not so irreconcileable as we represent them; since our Lord himself has shewn us that they may be reconciled. In one place he says, He that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth abroad [Note: Mat 12:30<\/span>.]: and in another place he says, He that is not against us, is for us [Note: Luk 9:50<\/span>.]: and therefore he may, in this latter passage, be said to have modified and tempered the severer language of the former. But there is no real opposition between the two passages: for if the occasions on which they were spoken be duly marked, it will be found that the former passage forbids neutrality in our own conduct; the latter forbids uncharitableness in judging of the conduct of others. Strong as are the declarations of our Lord and of St. Paul, which have been before cited, they fall far short of that which is spoken by St. James. From them we see that neutrality is treason<\/em>, in reference to God, just as it would be in an earthly kingdom, where a subject would not move to repel an invading enemy. But St. James declares, that even a wish<\/em> to preserve friendship with the world is nothing less than a direct act of rebellion against God. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever, therefore, will be (wishes to be)<\/em> the friend of the world, is (is thereby constituted<\/em>) the enemy of God [Note: Jam 4:4<\/span>. the Greek.],<\/p>\n

      On these grounds I conceive that the Apostles assertion admits not of the smallest doubt; but is plain, direct, and incontrovertible.]
      Let me now, then,<\/p>\n

      II.<\/p>\n

      Shew the bearing it should have on our life and conversation<\/p>\n

      It is of great importance for us to remember, that broad and unqualified assertions may easily be perverted, to the establishment of principles which, in reality, are false; and to the encouragement of conduct which is essentially unbecoming. It is the part of sound wisdom to make those discriminations, which will serve to guide an humble and conscientious Christian to an adjustment of contending claims, and to a discernment of the path of duty in difficult and conflicting circumstances. With a view to this, I will point out,<\/p>\n

      1.<\/p>\n

      Negatively, what effect this assertion should not produce<\/p>\n

      [It should not render us indifferent<\/em> to the opinions or feelings of those around us. Indifference to the feelings of others is highly criminal: it argues a want of love; without which divine principle, whatever a man may have, he is no better than sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal [Note: 1Co 13:1<\/span>.]. Those around us have immortal souls, for which we ought to be tenderly concerned: and, as they must of necessity be more or less affected by our conduct, and have their estimate of our principles influenced by the fruits which they produce, it becomes us, for their sakes<\/em>, to avoid casting any stumbling-block before them, or giving them any unnecessary offence. We should, as far as possible, prevent even our good from being evil spoken of [Note: Rom 14:16<\/span>.]. Nay further; we should endeavour to please men, yea, to please all men. Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification: for even Christ pleased not himself [Note: Rom 15:2-3<\/span>.]. Nay, I go further still, and say, that we ought to be ready to make considerable sacrifices for this very end: for St. Paul, speaking on this very subject, says, Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God: even as I please all men in all things<\/em>, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved [Note: 1Co 10:32-33<\/span>.]. Now, this is a point on which religious people, and young people especially, need to be put upon their guard. There is a self-will<\/em>, and self-pleasing<\/em>, in religious matters, as well as in things unconnected with religion: and there is a disposition to magnify the importance of matters that are indifferent, and to urge the claims of conscience<\/em> for things which are really dictated only by inclination<\/em>, and an undue pertinacity in these things frequently proves a greater stumbling-block to our friends and relatives, than a firm adherence to any positive duty would do. Still, however, I must guard this on the other hand; and say, that, in any concessions which we may make, we must look well to our motives, which, none but God can see. We must not comply with the wishes or solicitations of men, merely<\/em> to please them, or to avoid exciting their dipleasure: we must do it simply for their good to edification. This was the Apostles motive, in all his compliances: Though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more:<\/em> unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain<\/em> the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain<\/em> them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain<\/em> them that are without law: to the weak, became I as weak, that I might gain<\/em> the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some<\/em>. And this I do (not for my own<\/em> sake, but) for the Gospels sake<\/em>, that I might be partaker thereof with you [Note: 1Co 9:19-23<\/span>.]. Let this distinction be kept in view, and this principle be in operation, and we shall not materially err, either by pertinacity on the one hand, or by compliance on the other.<\/p>\n

      It may be said, that this mode of proceeding will make a Christians conduct extremely difficult and unnecessarily dangerous; and that it will be better to adhere to the broad line altogether, and to wave all consideration except for the good of our own souls. But to this I can by no means accede. I agree that this would be far easier<\/em>, and in some respects safer:<\/em> but I cannot therefore say that it is better<\/em>. It may be right to incur both difficulty and danger for the good<\/em> of others; though it would not be right to incur them merely for their gratification<\/em>. It would be right to expose our own lives to a tempest in a small boat for the sake of saving a shipwrecked crew, when it would be highly criminal to do so for the amusement of those on shore: and, if we do subject ourselves both to difficulty and a measure of danger for the everlasting salvation<\/em> of others, we may expect the Divine protection and blessing in our endeavours. Let us but serve our God according to his directions<\/em>, and we need not fear but that he will give his angels charge over us, to keep us in all our ways.]<\/p>\n

      2.<\/p>\n

      Positively, what effect this assertion should produce<\/p>\n

      [It must lead us to adopt a decided part, and never to swerve from the path of duty, even if the whole world should be against us. The conduct of the Apostles should be ours, whenever such an alternative is presented to us: Whether it be right to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye; for we cannot but do the things which our God requires [Note: Act 4:19-20<\/span>.]. We must be very careful to examine what the path of duty is; but, having ascertained it, we must not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, on any account whatever. We must not deviate from the path of duty, in a way either of commission or of omission. Suppose it said to us, as to the Hebrew Youths, Bow down to this idol, or thou shalt go into the fiery furnace; we should not hesitate to choose the fire in preference to the sin. Or if it were said, as to Daniel, Forbear to pray to thy God, or thou shalt be cast into the den of lions [Note: Daniel 3<\/span>.]; we should not hesitate to prefer the den of lions, to an abandonment of an acknowledged duty: nay, we should not even appear<\/em> to concede the point; but should serve God openly, and at all events [Note: Daniel 6<\/span>.]. As far as our Lord and the world go together, we should follow the world: but where they separate, we should let all men see whose we are, and whom we serve.]<\/p>\n

      Now, in this subject we may see,
      1.<\/p>\n

      Matter for serious inquiry<\/p>\n

      [Do I yet<\/em> please men? This has been the habit of us all in former times: for the unconverted man has no higher principle of action than this. But, if we have been truly converted unto God, we have given ourselves up to another Master, even Christ; and to serve and please him<\/em> is our chief, our only, aim. We must have no will<\/em>, no way<\/em>, but his. For him must we both live and die.<\/p>\n

      Well do I know, that our change, in this respect, is often imputed to us for evil; and that we are deemed weak, conceited, and fanatical, because we presume to judge for ourselves in this particular. But where eternity is at stake, how can we do otherwise? We must approve ourselves to God, and to our own conscience. In no other way can we have peace: in no other way can we ever attain to glory.
      And I cannot but say, that in what the world demand at our hands, they are very unreasonable. For they will not mete to us what they expect us to measure to them. They will not be persuaded by us<\/em> to do the smallest thing for God, and for their own souls. If, to please us, they read a book which we put into their hands, or attend upon a ministry which we have recommended, they think they make mighty concessions; though, in the daily habit of their minds, they are as much addicted to the world as others: but there are no bounds to the concessions which they require of us: nor are they ever satisfied, till they have drawn us into the same vortex with themselves. I must therefore recommend extreme caution in carrying into effect the very advice which I myself have given. For though to please all men is a legitimate and becoming object of pursuit, if you have attained it you will have great reason to suspect yourselves: for you will have attained what neither our Lord nor his Apostles ever did, or ever could. If all men speak well of you, you may be perfectly assured that you have been unfaithful to your God, and that nothing but a woe attends you [Note: Luk 6:26<\/span>.].]<\/p>\n

      2.<\/p>\n

      Matter for unceasing consolation<\/p>\n

      [It is extremely painful to have our friends and relations displeased with us, as they assuredly will be, if we give up ourselves unreservedly to the Lord. Our blessed Lord has told us, that, though this was not the end<\/em> of his coming, it is, and will be, the effect: I am come, says he, to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against the mother, and the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law: and a mans foes shall be those of his own household [Note: Mat 10:35-36<\/span>.]. But then we should ask ourselves, Have I, like Enoch, this testimony, that I have pleased God [Note: Heb 11:5<\/span>.]? If I have, I am satisfied. I would most gladly, if it were in my power, please all who are connected with me: but if they reduce me to the dilemma of either displeasing them or God, they must excuse me: for I must obey God rather than man [Note: Act 5:29<\/span>.]. The persons who are offended with me, would expect their servant to obey them rather than a stranger: and is not God entitled to that deference from me? I am a servant of Jesus Christ; and I must, at the peril of my soul, obey him. And as our blessed Lord said respecting his own conduct to his heavenly Father, I do always those things which please him [Note: Joh 8:29<\/span>.]; so, God helping me, will I say: and if I stand condemned for it at mans tribunal, I have this comfort, that, when standing at the tribunal of my God, he will say, Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord [Note: Mat 25:21<\/span>.].]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n


      <\/strong><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      <\/strong><\/p>\n

      Ver. 10. For do I now persuade men<\/strong> ] That is, men’s doctrines and devices.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      Or do I seek to please men<\/strong> ] Ut<\/em> , qui ab omnibus gratiam inire cupit, quem quidam per iocum Placentam vocat.<\/em> Men pleasers, that curry favour with all, and covet to be counted no meddlers. These lose a friend of God. Neither do they long hold in with those whom for present they do so much please. Constantine checked a preacher, qui ausus est imperatorem in os beatum dicere, <\/em> that was so bold as to call him a blessed man to his face, thinking thereby to ingratiate. (Euseb. de Vit. Const.) Theodoric, an Arian king, did exceedingly affect a certain deacon, although an orthodox. The deacon thinking to please him better and get preferment, became an Arian; which when the king understood, he changed his love into hatred, and caused his head to be struck from his shoulders. Erasmus, by seeking to please both sides, was neither owned by the Papists nor honoured by the Protestants, Pusillanimitas et<\/em> in praeclaro hoc Dei organo praepotuere.<\/em> Dastardliness and man pleasance prevailed too much with him, who otherwise did the Church of God singular good service. (Amama.) How much better had he done if passing by Placenza he had held a straight course to Verona! but he dared not (as Luther) meddle either with the pope’s triple crown, or with the monks’ fat paunches, lest for his Vae vobis<\/em> Woe to you, he should have been brought coram nobis, <\/em> publicly to us, as father Latimer said. He held it best policy to keep his finger out of the sore: and either to say no more than Eli did to his sons, “Why do ye such things,” &c., or than Jehoshaphat did to Ahab, “Let not the king say so.” As pruriginosa istorum hominum scabies aspetiori certe strigili fricanda fuerat, <\/em> saith Amama. But those men’s mangy hides deserved a sharper currycomb.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      For if I yet pleased men<\/strong> ] As once I did while I was a Pharisee.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

      I should not be, &c.<\/strong> ] That rule holds good in rhetoric, but not in divinity, Non ad veritatem solum, sed etiam ad opinionem eorum qui audiunt, accommodanda est oratio.<\/em> (Cic. in Partib.) <\/p>\n

      Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      10<\/strong> .] For<\/strong> (accounting for, and by so doing, softening, the seeming harshness of the last saying, by the fact which follows) am I<\/strong> NOW ( takes up the of the last verse, having here the principal emphasis on it, q. d. ‘in saying this,’ ‘in what I have just said;’ ‘is this like an example of men-pleasing?’) persuading<\/strong> (seeking to win over to me, nearly; see reff.) MEN (see 1Co 4:3<\/span> ; 2Co 5:11<\/span> ; not, as Erasm. (al. not Luther), ‘num res humanas suadeo, an divinas?’ nor as Calvin, ‘suadeone secundum homines an secundum Deum?’) or<\/strong> ( am I conciliating<\/strong> ) ( losing its more proper meaning, as of course, when thus applied) God? or am I seeking to please<\/strong> MEN (a somewhat wider expression than the other, embracing his whole course of procedure)? ( Nay<\/strong> ) if I any longer<\/strong> (implying that such is the course of the world before conversion to Christ; not necessarily referring back to the time before his own conversion, any more than that is contained by implication in the words, but rather perhaps to the accumulated enormity of his being, after all he had gone through, a man-pleaser) were pleasing men<\/strong> (either (1) imperf., = ‘seeking to please:’ so that the fact, of being well-pleasing to men, does not come into question; or (2) as Mey., ‘the fact of pleasing, result of seeking<\/em> to please:’ ‘if I were popular with men:’ the construction will bear both), I were not<\/strong> ( <\/strong> is a late form, found however in Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 9: see Ellic. here) the<\/strong> (or a, but better ‘the’) servant of Christ<\/strong> . Some interpret . . as Chr., , . But this would more naturally be expressed by , and, as Mey. remarks, would give a very flat and poor sense: it is better therefore to take in its ethical, not its historical meaning.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10-24<\/span> . REPUDIATION OF CORRUPT MOTIVES. EVIDENCE FROM PAUL’S PERSONAL HISTORY THAT HIS CONVERSION WAS DUE TO GOD, AND THAT HE WAS TAUGHT THE GOSPEL BY GOD INDEPENDENTLY OF THE TWELVE AND OF JERUSALEM.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/span> . The order of words in the Greek text forbids the stress laid in our versions on the alternative men or God<\/em> ; the meaning of which is besides a little obscure in this connection. The true rendering of is rather than<\/em> (= ), as in Mat 18:8<\/span> , Luk 15:7<\/span> ; Luk 17:2 , 1Co 14:19<\/span> : Am I now persuading men rather than God?<\/em> This language indicates clearly what kind of calumnies had been circulated. His detractors accused him of sacrificing the truth of God for the sake of persuading men. It was, we know, his boast that he became all things to all men<\/em> , but whereas his real motive was that he might win all to Christ, they insinuated that he was more bent on winning favour with men than on securing the approval of God. During his recent visit he had made two concessions to Jewish feeling; he had circumcised Timothy, and had recommended for adoption regulations tending to promote harmonious intercourse between Jewish and Gentile converts. It was easy to misrepresent these concessions as an abandonment of his former principles: and they furnished his enemies accordingly with a handle for decrying him as a time-server without fixed principles, now bent on winning Jewish favour, as he had been before on gaining the Gentiles (see Introd., p. 145, and cf.<\/em> Gal 1:11<\/span> ). . The Greek text throws the emphasis on this word, and its subtle irony is brought out by the which follows. “Am I doing this now?<\/em> Do you charge me now<\/em> (he says in effect to these partisans of Judaism) with regarding men more than God? There was<\/em> a time, before I knew Christ, when I did study to please men: if that were still my desire, I should not have been a servant of Christ.”<\/p>\n

      Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      do I, &c. = am I persuading. Greek., peitho. App-150. <\/p>\n

      do I seek = am I seeking. <\/p>\n

      pleased = were pleasing. <\/p>\n

      servant. Greek. doulos. App-190. <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      10.] For (accounting for, and by so doing, softening, the seeming harshness of the last saying, by the fact which follows) am I NOW ( takes up the of the last verse, having here the principal emphasis on it,-q. d. in saying this,-in what I have just said; is this like an example of men-pleasing?) persuading (seeking to win over to me, nearly; see reff.) MEN (see 1Co 4:3; 2Co 5:11; not, as Erasm. (al. not Luther), num res humanas suadeo, an divinas?-nor as Calvin, suadeone secundum homines an secundum Deum?) or (am I conciliating) ( losing its more proper meaning, as of course, when thus applied) God? or am I seeking to please MEN (a somewhat wider expression than the other, embracing his whole course of procedure)? (Nay) if I any longer (implying that such is the course of the world before conversion to Christ; not necessarily referring back to the time before his own conversion, any more than that is contained by implication in the words, but rather perhaps to the accumulated enormity of his being, after all he had gone through, a man-pleaser) were pleasing men (either (1) imperf., = seeking to please: so that the fact, of being well-pleasing to men, does not come into question; or (2) as Mey., the fact of pleasing, result of seeking to please: if I were popular with men: the construction will bear both), I were not ( is a late form, found however in Xen. Cyr. vi. 1. 9: see Ellic. here) the (or a, but better the) servant of Christ. Some interpret . . as Chr., , . But this would more naturally be expressed by , and, as Mey. remarks, would give a very flat and poor sense: it is better therefore to take in its ethical, not its historical meaning.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10. , for now) The reason why even now he writes with such asseverations: now is repeated from Gal 1:9.-, men) This word is without the article, but presently after, , God, with the article. Regard is to be had to God alone.-) , is much the same as the word , which presently occurs, I seek to please any one: , to obtain the consent or indulgence of any one. Plato de Leg. lib. 10, at the beginning; comp. 2Co 5:11, note.-, men) The antithesis is, of Christ.-, yet) The meaning is, I have not heretofore sought, nor do I yet seek to please men; comp. yet, ch. Gal 5:11. The particles of the present time, , now, and , yet, refute the words of him who troubled the Galatians. They here distinguish the present from the former time, not only when he was a Pharisee, but likewise when he was an apostle. As to the time when he was a Pharisee, Paul neither denies nor affirms in this passage. Paul not long before had circumcised Timothy for example. They were wishing to turn that circumstance as a conclusive argument against him with the Galatians.-, men) for the feelings of men are at variance with those of God and Christ; hence, the evil of this present world, Gal 1:4.-, I pleased) , I seek to please, Rom 8:8, note. A man generally either pleases or displeases him, whom he either seeks or does not seek to please. , of Christ) whom I seek to please, as is becoming in a servant, Tit 2:9.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/p>\n

      Gal 1:10<\/p>\n

      For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men?-It seems that he had been accused of being a time-server who sought to ingratiate himself by becoming all things to all men (1Co 9:22); in proof of this accusation they could point to the circumcision of Timothy as an effort to gain Jewish favor, and to his repudiation of the law as an attempt to conciliate the Gentiles, in admitting them to salvation in Christ without circumcision.<\/p>\n

      if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ.-In this he reaffirms a truth set forth by Jesus: How can ye believe, who receive glory one of another, and the glory that cometh from the 6nly God ye seek not? (Joh 5:44). This clearly teaches that they who seek honor from men cannot believe in Jesus. Men seeking to be popular with the world cannot be true faithful believers in, and servants of, Jesus Christ. [That popularity with men and the service of Christ are incompatible Paul knew from actual experience immediately after he entered the service of Christ, for his former friends took counsel to kill him (Act 9:23), and even at the time of writing persecution had not ceased (Gal 5:11).]<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Lecture 3<\/p>\n

      Pauls Conversion And Apostleship<\/p>\n

      Gal 1:10-24<\/p>\n

      For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: and profited in the Jews religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mothers womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lords brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; and was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: but they had heard only, that he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And they glorified God in me. (vv. 10-24)<\/p>\n

      The apostle Paul in this section is obliged to defend his apostleship. There is something pitiable about that. He had come to these Galatians when they were heathen, when they were idolaters, and had been Gods messenger to them. Through him they had been brought to the Lord Jesus Christ. But they had fallen under the influence of false teachers, and now looked down upon the man who had led them to Christ; they despised his ministry and felt they were far better informed than he. This is not the only time in the history of the church that such things have happened. Often we see young converts happy and radiant in the knowledge of sins forgiven, until under the influence of false teachers they look with contempt upon those who presented the gospel to them.<\/p>\n

      In the first place, Paul undertakes to show how he became the apostle to the Gentiles. In verse 10 he says, For do I now persuade men, or God? What does he mean by that? Do I seek the approval of men or of God? Manifestly, of God. The apostle Paul was not a timeserver, he was not seeking simply to please men who in a little while would have to stand before God in judgment, if they died in their sins. His express purpose was to do the will of the One who had saved him and commissioned him to preach the gospel of His grace. So he says, I am not attempting to seek the approval of men, but of God. I do not seek to please men, that is, I am not trying to get their approbation. It is true that in another verse he says, Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification (Rom 15:2), but there is no contradiction there. It is right and proper to seek in every way I can to please and help my friend, my neighbor, my brother; but on the other hand, when I attempt to preach the Word of God, I am to do it not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts (1Th 2:4). The preacher who speaks with mans approval as his object is untrue to the commission given to him. If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. He would simply be making himself the servant of men.<\/p>\n

      But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. The gospel differs from every human religious system. In some of our universities they study what is called, The Science of Comparative Religions. The study of comparative religions is both very interesting and informative, if you consider, for instance, the great religions of the pagan world such as Buddhism, Brahmanism, Islam. They have much in common, and much in which they stand in contrast one to another. But when you take Christianity and put it in with these religions, you make a mistake; Christianity is not simply a religion, it is a divine revelation. Paul says, I did not get my gospel from men. No man communicated it to me. I received it directly from heaven. Of course we do not all get it in this way, as a direct revelation, as Paul did, and yet, in every instance, if a man is brought to understand the truth of the gospel, it is because the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Christ, opens that mans heart and mind and understanding to comprehend the truth. Otherwise he would not receive it. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1Co 2:14), and of course the natural man is not pleased with this divine revelation. Men are pleased when the preacher glosses over their sins, when he makes excuses for their wrongdoings, when he panders to their weaknesses or flatters them as they attempt to work out a righteousness of their own. But when a man preaches the gospel of the grace of God and insists upon mans utterly lost and ruined condition, declares that he is unable to do one thing to save himself, but must be saved through the atoning death of the Lord Jesus Christ, there is nothing about that to please the natural man. It is divine grace that opens the heart to receive that revelation. That was the revelation that came to Paul.<\/p>\n

      There was a time when the apostle hated Christianity, when he did all in his power to destroy the infant church, and now he says to these Galatians, Ye have heard of my conversation [that is, my behavior] in time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. Twice here he uses the expression, The Jews religion (vv. 13-14). The original word simply means Judaism, and is not to be confounded with the word used in the epistle of James, Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world (Jam 1:27). There religion is used in a proper sense, and we who are saved should be characterized by that; but as the apostle uses the word here it is something entirely different. The two English words, Jews religion, are translated from the one Greek word which means Judaism. Paul hoped through that to save his soul and gain favor with God, until through a divine revelation he had an altogether different conception of things. As long as he believed in Judaism he persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. One of the pitiable things that has occurred since is that members of the professed church of God have turned around to persecute the people of Judaism. Strange, this seems, when Jesus says, Do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you (Mat 5:44).<\/p>\n

      Paul hated Christianity. He persecuted Christians and tried to root up Christianity from the earth, and says that he profited in the Jews religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. He could say, After the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee (Act 26:5). Judaism was dearer than life to him. He thought it was the only truth, that all men, if they would know God at all, must find Him through Judaism. He was exceedingly zealous of the traditions of the fathers, not only of what was written in the Bible, in the law of Moses, what the prophets had declared, but added to that the great body of such traditions as have come down to the Jews of the present day in the Talmud. He would have lived and died an advocate of Judaism if it had not been for the miracle of grace. How did it happen that this Jew who could see nothing good in Christianity turned about and became its greatest exponent? There is no way of accounting for it except through the matchless sovereign grace of God. Something took place in that mans heart and life that changed his entire viewpoint, that made him the protagonist who devoted over thirty years of his life to making Christ known to Jews and Gentiles. He tells us what brought about the change: But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mothers womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood (vv. 15-16). When the appointed time came, when God in sovereign grace said, as it were, Arrest that man, and stopped him on the Damascus turnpike, and when Christ in glory appeared to him, Saul of Tarsus was brought to see that he had been fighting against Israels Messiah and Gods blessed Son. Then Christ was not only revealed to him, but Christ was revealed in him.<\/p>\n

      We have both the objective and the subjective sides of truth. When I as a poor sinner saw the Lord Jesus suffering, bleeding, dying for me, when I saw that He was wounded for my transgressions, he was bruised for my iniquities, when I realized that He had been delivered up for my offenses and raised again for my justification, when I put my hearts trust in Him, when I believed that objective truth, then something took place within me subjectively. Christ came to dwell in my very heart. Christ in you, says the apostle, the hope of glory. It pleased God to reveal His Son not only to me but in me. I was brought to know Him in a richer, fuller way than I could know the dearest earthly friend. It was no longer for Paul a matter of one religion against another. Now he had a divine commission to go forth and make known to other men the Christ who had become so real to him. So when this glorious event took place, when through Gods sovereign grace he was brought to know the Lord Jesus Christ, he says, I realized that this glorious understanding was not for me alone but that I might make Him known to others; it pleased God to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen. When the Lord saved Paul He told him He had that in view.<\/p>\n

      In Acts 9, in the story of the apostles conversion, we read that God spoke to Ananias and sent him to see Paul in the street called Straight in Damascus. He did not want to go at first, he was afraid he would be taking his life in his hands; but the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: for I will show him how great things he must suffer for my names sake (Act 9:15-16). So Ananias went in obedience to the vision and communicated the mind of God to Paul. The Lord had already said, I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee (Act 26:16-17). Preeminently he was the apostle to the Gentiles, but he also had a wonderful ministry for his own people, and all through his life his motto was, To the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Rom 1:16). Into city after city he went hunting out the synagogues or finding individual Jews or groups, telling them of the great change that had come to him and pleading with them to submit to the same wonderful Savior. When they rejected his message, he turned to the Gentiles and preached the gospel to them.<\/p>\n

      Some of these Galatians questioned whether he really was an apostle, for he never saw the Lord when He was here on earth; he did not get his commission from the twelve. He says, No, I did not, and I glory in that I am an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ. I received my commission from heaven when I saw the risen Christ in glory and He came to make His abode in my heart. He commissioned me to go out and preach His message. Immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood. They thought he should have gone to Jerusalem to sit down and talk the matter over with the other apostles, and find out whether they endorsed him and were prepared to ordain him to the Christian ministry, or something like that. But he says, No, I did not seek anyone out, nor confer with any one. My commission was from heaven, to carry it out in dependence upon the living God. So he adds, Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus (v. 17). He did not go at the beginning to what they considered the headquarters of the Christian church, Jerusalem, to get authorization. Instead of that he seems to have slipped away. In reading Acts we would not know this, but here he indicates that he went into Arabia Petra, and there in some quiet place, perhaps living in a cave, he spent some time waiting on God that he might have things cleared up in his own mind. He wanted time to think things out, time for God to speak to him, and in which he could speak to God. There the truth in all its fullness, its beauty, its glory, opened up to him. It was not there that he had the revelation of the body of Christ. He received that on the Damascus turnpike when the Lord said to him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? What a revelation was that of the body that all believers on earth constitute! They are so intimately linked with their glorious Head in heaven that one member cannot be touched without affecting their Head. There was a great deal he needed to understand, and so into the wilderness he went.<\/p>\n

      Have you ever noticed how many of Gods beloved servants had their finishing courses in the university of the wilderness? When God wanted to fit Moses to be the leader of His people He sent him to the wilderness. He had gone through all the Egyptian schools, and thought he was ready to be the deliverer of Gods people. When he left the university of Egypt he may have said, Now I am ready to undertake my great lifework. But, immediately, he started killing Egyptians and hiding them in the sand, and God says, You are not ready yet, Moses; you need a post-graduate course. He was forty years learning the wisdom of Egypt, and forty years forgetting it and learning the wisdom of God, and finally, when he received his post-graduate degree he was sent of God to deliver His people.<\/p>\n

      Elijah had his time in the wilderness. David had his time there. Oh, those years in the wilderness when hunted by King Saul like a partridge on the mountainside. They were used to help fit him for his great work. And then think of our blessed Lord Himself! He was baptized in the Jordan, presenting Himself there in accordance with the Word of God as the One who was to go to the cross to fulfill all righteousness on behalf of needy sinners, and the Holy Spirit like a dove descended upon Him. He then went into the wilderness for forty days, and prayed and fasted in view of the great ministry upon which He was to enter. Then He passed through that serious temptation of Satan, emerging triumphant, and went forth to preach the gospel of the kingdom. Now here is this man who hated His name, who detested Christianity, but after having had a sight of the risen Christ he goes off into the wilderness for a period of meditation, prayer, and instruction before he commences his great work. Then he says he returned again unto Damascus, and he preached Christ in the synagogues that he is the Son of God. If you read carefully in the book of Acts you will see that it was not until after the conversion of Paul that any one preached Christ as the Son of God. I know the expression, Thy holy Child Jesus, is used, but the better rendering is Servant. Peter preached Jesus as the Messiah, the Servant, but Paul began the testimony that Jesus was in very truth the Son of God. When the Lord Jesus interrogated Peter, Whom say ye that I am? Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mat 16:15-16). But it was not yet Gods time to make that known, for the message was limited, in measure, to the people of Israel in the early part of Acts. But when Saul was converted, without fear of man he preached in those very synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God and he himself now was persecuted bitterly by those who once admired him as the leader in their religious practices.<\/p>\n

      Three years went by before this man went to Jerusalem. He went from place to place and finally did go there, but not in order to be ordained or recognized as an apostle. In verse 18 he tells us why he went up, Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. The word see in the original is very interesting. It is the Greek word from which we get our English word, history, the telling of a story, talking things over, and so Paul says that after three years he went up to Jerusalem to relate his history to Peter, to talk things over with him, to tell him what the Lord had done. What a wonderful meeting that was! It would have been wonderful, unnoticed in a corner of the room, to have heard the conversation. Peter who had known the Lord, who had denied the Lord, who had been so wonderfully restored, who preached with such power on the day of Pentecost and was used so mightily to open the door to the Jews and then to the Gentiles, Peter told his story and Paul told his. And when they got through I imagine Peter would say, Well, Paul, you have the same message I have, but I think the Lord has given you more than He has given to me, and I want to give you the right hand of fellowship. I rejoice in your ministry, and we can go on together proclaiming this glad, glorious gospel. Fifteen days of wonderful fellowship!<\/p>\n

      As to the rest of the apostles Paul says, But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lords brother. We are not certain which James he means. He may be the man referred to as James the son of Alphaeus, the cousin of the Lord, who would be spoken of as His brother. My personal opinion is that he is the James who occupies so large a place in the book of Acts-James who was the brother of our Lord Jesus Christ, who did not believe while the Savior was here on earth, but was brought to believe in Him in resurrection, and who led the church of God in Jerusalem. Paul saw him, but from none of them did he get any special endorsement or authorization. He met them on common ground. They were apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ; so was he, by divine appointment.<\/p>\n

      Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Strange that he should have to say this! Strange that these Galatians, his own converts, should think for a moment that he might be untruthful! But when one gets under the power of false teaching, as a rule he is ready to make all kinds of charges as to the integrity, the honesty of other people. And so it is here, and the apostle has to say, The things that I am telling you are true. I am not lying.<\/p>\n

      After returning from Jerusalem he launched out on his great missionary program. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; and was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ. He had been known among other assemblies in Judaism, Jewish assemblies knew him well, but Christians in Judea, believers who had separated from Judaism, had never seen him. But they had heard only, that he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And what power there was in that! Here was the man who had gone to all lengths to turn a man away from Christ, even attempted to compel him to blaspheme, threatened him with death if he would not repudiate the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now this great change has come, and word is going through the churches, The great persecutor has become an evangelist; he is no longer our enemy, but is preaching to others the same faith that means so much to us. And they glorified God in me. Truly, Pauls conversion was a divine, sovereign work of grace, and praise and glory redounded to the One who had chosen, commissioned, and sent him forth.<\/p>\n

      The abundant resultant fruit was to His glory. Nothing gives such power to the ministry of Christ as genuine conversion. I do not understand how any man can presume to be a minister who does not know the reality of a personal conversion and the truth of the gospel.<\/p>\n

      That gospel has lost none of its power. It can work just as wonderful miracles today for men who will put their trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Have you trusted Him? Have you believed in Him? Is He your Savior? Do you know what it means to be converted? Can you say, Thank God, my soul is saved; God has revealed His Son in me?<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      For now do <\/p>\n

      The demonstration is as follows: <\/p>\n

      (1) The Galatians know Paul, that he is no seeker after popularity Gal 1:10. <\/p>\n

      (2) He puts his known character back of the assertion that his Gospel of grace was a revelation from God (Gal 1:11; Gal 1:12). <\/p>\n

      (3) As for the Judaizers, Paul had been a foremost Jew, and had forsaken Judaism for something better (Gal 1:13; Gal 1:14). <\/p>\n

      (4) He had preached grace years before he saw any of the other apostles (Gal 1:15-24). <\/p>\n

      (5) When he did meet the other apostles they had nothing to add to his revelations Gal 2:1-6. <\/p>\n

      (6) The other apostles fully recognized Paul’s apostleship. Gal 2:7-10. <\/p>\n

      (7) If the legalizers pleaded Peter’s authority, the answer was that he himself had claimed none when rebuked (Gal 2:11-14). <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      do I now: Act 4:19, Act 4:20, Act 5:29, 2Co 5:9-11, 1Th 2:4 <\/p>\n

      persuade: 1Sa 21:7, Mat 28:14, Act 12:20, Rom 2:8,*Gr: 1Jo 3:9 <\/p>\n

      do I seek: 2Co 12:19, 1Th 2:4 <\/p>\n

      for if: Mat 22:16, Rom 15:1, Rom 15:2, 1Co 10:33, Eph 6:6, Col 3:22, Jam 4:4 <\/p>\n

      the servant: Rom 1:1 <\/p>\n

      Reciprocal: Deu 33:9 – Who said 1Sa 15:24 – I feared 1Ki 22:14 – what the Lord 2Ki 16:11 – built an altar 2Ch 18:13 – even what my God 2Ch 32:15 – persuade Job 32:22 – I know not Jer 15:19 – let them Dan 3:26 – ye servants Mat 6:24 – serve Mar 12:14 – carest Luk 19:13 – his Luk 20:21 – sayest Joh 12:26 – serve Act 12:3 – he saw Act 20:19 – Serving Act 24:27 – willing Rom 6:22 – become Rom 16:18 – serve 1Co 2:4 – enticing 1Co 7:22 – is Christ’s 2Co 5:11 – we persuade Col 3:24 – for Col 4:12 – a servant 1Th 2:6 – of men 2Ti 2:15 – approved 1Jo 2:15 – Love not<\/p>\n

      Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10. , ;-For do I now conciliate men or God? or, Now, is it men I am conciliating, or God? The emphatic of this verse must have the same sense as that of the preceding verse-now, at the present moment, or as I am writing. It cannot contrast vaguely the apostle’s present with his previous unconverted Jewish state, as is held by Winer, Rckert, Matthies, Bisping, Olshausen, Neander, and Turner. For, grammatically, we cannot well sever the second in meaning and reference from the first; and historically, the favour of men was not a ruling motive with the apostle in his pharisaic state. Philippians 3. The connection is somewhat more difficult, as expressed by . It might mean, Well, now, am I pleasing men? Klotz-Devarius, 2.245. But it rather states an argument. It is no apology, as Dr. Brown takes it, for the preceding language; nor, as Alford similarly asserts, softening the seeming harshness of the saying. It states the reason idiomatically why he pronounces anathema on the Judaizers,-that he did it from divine sanction, or in accordance with the divine will. His fidelity was so stern, that it might be unpalatable to his enemies; but he was securing through it the friendship of God. There is some probability that he is rebutting a calumny of his opponents (Usteri, Lightfoot), based on a misconstruction of some previous portion of his career, such as the circumcision of Timothy. The verb , to persuade, signifies, by a natural transition, to conciliate by persuasion or to make friends of. Act 12:20; Act 14:19. Josephus, , Ant. 4.6, 5; , Pindar, Ol. 2.80, ed. Dissen; , a portion of a line ascribed by Suidas to Hesiod; Plato, De Repub. 3.344, 390 E, do. Opera, vol. iii. pp. 146, 231, ed. Stallbaum; similarly Euripides, Medea, 960. There is no occasion to attach to the verb the idea of conatus as distinct from effectus: For am I, at the moment of uttering such an anathema against perverters of the gospel, making friends of men or of God? What but faithfulness to my divine commission can prompt me to it? It was no human passion, no personal animosity, no envious or jealous emotion at being superseded in the affections of the Galatian churches: it was simply duty done in compliance with the ruling motive of his soul, and to enjoy and secure the divine complacency. The noun , wanting the article, is men generally, while has it, as if to specialize it by the contrast. The connection of with is no formal zeugma, though the sense is necessarily changed with such a change of object. What fully applies to men can only in a vaguer reference apply to God; but it has suggested several improbable forms of exegesis. Calvin goes the length of interposing a before the two nouns, owing to what he calls the ambiguity of the Greek construction; and nothing, he adds, is more common with the Greeks than to leave understood: Do I persuade according to men or God? Webster and Wilkinson apparently follow Estius, non apud homines judices, sed apud tribunal Dei causam hanc ago, but without any warrant or adduced example. Piscator renders, Do I persuade you to believe men or God? Utrum vobis suadeo ut hominibus credatis an ut Deo? Luther, Erasmus, Vatablus, and others give, Num res humanas suadeo an divinas? But governing a person is distinct in meaning from governing a thing or object; being, as Meyer remarks, quite distinct from . The meaning is more fully explained in the following clause, where the apostle adds more broadly: <\/p>\n

      ] ;-or am I seeking to please men? the stress being on . To please men was not his endeavour or pervading aim: it was no motive of his; for he adds: <\/p>\n

      , -If still men I were pleasing, Christ’s servant I should not be. The leading nouns, and , are in emphatic contrast. The received text reads , after the slender authority, D & sup2, 3;, E, K, L, the Syriac and Greek fathers; whereas A, B, D1, F, G, , the Vulgate, and many Latin fathers want it. The asyndeton, however, is the more powerful. Tischendorf, indeed, says, a correctore alienissimum est; but the seems really to be a natural emendation, as if giving point to the argument by it as a connecting particle. There is no conatus in the imperfect, as Usteri, Schott, Bagge, and others hold. He says, not, if I were studying to please; but, if, the study being successful, I were pleasing men. The result implies the previous effort. The particle , still, gives intensity to the declaration, and looks back to . Bumlein, Griech. Part. p. 118. If, after all that has happened me, my devoted service to Christ, and the deadly hostility I have encountered, I were yet pleasing men,-if yet such a motive ruled me, Christ’s servant I should not be. The form of the imperfect is peculiar, being used , according to Moeris. It occurs in the later writers, and is used by Xenophon, Cyro. 6.1, 9, and Lysias, Areopag. p. 304, ed. Dobson. Its use is not confined to its occurrence with . Lobeck, Phrynichus, p. 152. It is quite common in the New Testament: Mat 25:35, Joh 11:15, Act 10:30; Act 11:5; Act 11:17, 1Co 13:11,-all without . After with a past indicative in the protasis, in the apodosis points out an impossible condition. Donaldson, 502. The apostle calls himself in various places. Compare Joh 13:16; Joh 15:15; Joh 15:20; Rom 1:1; Tit 1:1; Php 1:1; Col 4:12; 2Ti 2:24. Here he may refer to the inner nature of all Christian service, which admits of no compromise between the Master and the world, and especially to such service embodied and wrought out in the varied spheres and amidst the numerous temptations of his apostleship. See under Php 1:1. The Greek fathers, followed by Koppe, Paulus, Rckert, take the words in a historical sense: If my object had been to please men, I should not have become a servant of Christ. But, as has been remarked, would have been more fitting words to express such an idea. Besides, such a contrast does not seem to be before the apostle’s mind, nor could such a reference be in harmony with the supernatural and resistless mode in which he had become a servant of Christ. It is better to take the words in an ethical sense: I should not be Christ’s servant: man-pleasing and His service are in direct conflict. No one can serve Him who makes it his study to be popular with men. For to His servant His will is the one law, His work the one service, His example the one pattern, His approval the continuous aim, and His final acceptance the one great hope. 1Co 4:2-4; 2Co 11:23. This declaration of the apostle as to his ruling motive is not opposed to what he says of himself in 1Co 9:20; 1Co 10:33 : To the Jews I became as a Jew; all things to all men; to please all men in all things. There he is referring to his versatility of accommodation to national and individual humours and failings in cases where no principle was involved. Though he claimed entire liberty, he would not, by acting it out, wound unnecessarily the feelings of a weak brother. To please himself, he would not stir up prejudices in fellow-believers. To conciliate them he made himself the servant of all, by continuous self-denial in things indifferent. He might, but he did not; he could, but he would not. He had a claim of support from the churches, but he preferred at Corinth to labour with his own hands for his maintenance. He believed that an idol was nothing in the world, and that one could without sin sit down to a repast in a Gentile’s house; but if his liberty were challenged by a scrupulous conscience, he should at once abstain. Without a grudge he yielded his freedom, though he felt the objection to be frivolous, for he sought the profit of the many. But while there was such wise and tender forbearance in minor matters which were naturally left open questions among believers, many of whom could not rise to the realization of the perfect law of liberty, his adherence to principle was uniform and unyielding towards all classes, and on all occasions. These two modes of action are quite coalescent in a mind so upright, and yet so considerate,-so stern, and yet so unselfish,-so elevated, and yet so very practical, as was that of the apostle of the Gentiles. <\/p>\n

      The apostle in the first verse had asserted the reality and divine origin of his apostleship,-that it came from the one highest source, Jesus Christ; and then, in Gal 1:8-9, he had maintained, in distinct and unmistakeable phrase, that the gospel preached by him was the one true gospel. He now takes up the apologetic part of the epistle, and proceeds to explain and defend his second position, for both were livingly connected. The gospel preached by him was in no sense human, as his apostleship rested in no sense on a human basis. He had not been one of the original twelve, and he had not companied with Christ; and this posteriority had been apparently laid hold of to his disadvantage, as if his gospel were but secondary, and he had been indebted for it and his office to human teaching and authority. But the truth proclaimed by him and the office held by him, not only sprang from a primary relationship to Christ, but had even no human medium of conveyance. The apostle therefore argues this point, that his gospel had Christ for its immediate source, and revelation for its medium of disclosure to him; that he was not indebted to the other apostles for it; that he had held no consultation with them as his tutors or advisers, for his apostleship rested on a basis of its own but identical with theirs; and that, in fine, they recognised it not as a derived and dependent office, or as in any way holding of them, but as a distinct, collateral, and original commission. Therefore he says: <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10. Persuade in this passage means “to make friends of, win one’s favor, gain one’s good-will; to seek to win one, strive to please one,” according to Thayer. Paul makes his statement in question form, but he really is denying that he is trying to please men with his preaching. The basic reason is that he could not be a servant of Christ while preaching in a way to win the favor of men. He was resolved to be true to God even though he would lose the friendship of the whole world. This was in agreement with his statement in Rom 3:4.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10. accounts for, and thus softens, the apparently excessive severity of the preceding condemnation. The service of the gospel is absolutely irreconcilable with the selfish service of men. We should indeed serve our fellow-men (comp. Rom 15:1-3), but for Gods sake, and for the promotion of his glory.<\/p>\n

      Persuading, trying to conciliate or to gain favor by persuasion.<\/p>\n

      Still, i.e., after my call to the apostleship, and all that has happened to me. This does not necessarily imply that in his former state he was a time-server and pleaser of men, who sought the favor of the Jews when he persecuted the Christians. He was never dishonest or dishonorable. A certain manly independence and fearless regard to duty seems to have characterized him even before his conversion.<\/p>\n

      I should not be a servant of Christ (lit., bondman, slave), as described with such power and beauty, 1Co 4:9-13; 2Co 11:23 ff. The Galatian heretics, under the assumed character of servants of Christ, sought not the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls, but only the favor of men and their own profit. The Greek fathers miss the meaning when they explain: I would not have left Judaism and become a Christian.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Our apostle in these words discovers the great sincerity used in preaching the pure and unmixed doctrine of the gospel to the Galatians; for he did not persuade that men, but God, should be heard and obeyed, that so their faith might be founded upon divine, and not human authority; nor did he in his ministry aim at pleasing men, but Christ: for should he now please men, being an apostle, as he did at times past, being a Pharisee, he should not be the servant of Christ. <\/p>\n

      The ministers of Christ must not be men-pleasers; they must not please men either by flattery or falsehood, nor accommodate their doctrines to the humour and dispositions of men; pleasing of God is our great work and business, let us mind that: man-pleasing is endless, and needless, any farther than for their good, and the gospel’s gain.<\/p>\n

      Accordingly, the apostle tells us elsewhere, that he was made all things to all men, that he might gain some: not to make a present gain of them, but that they might be eternal gainers by him; it was not to exalt himself, but that Christ might be exalted in the hearts and lives of his hearers, that he sought in and by his ministry to please all men; and thus in imitation of him, let us seek to please all men for their good to edification.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Gal 1:10. For He here adds the reason why he speaks so confidently; do I now persuade, or satisfy, men Is this what I aim at in preaching or writing? or God? Do I endeavour, in my ministry, to ingratiate myself with men, or to approve myself to God? Or do I seek to please men By a compliance with their prejudices or designs? For if I yet Or still, as before my conversion; pleased men Studied to please them; if this were my motive of action, nay, if I did in fact please the men who know not God, I should not be the servant of Christ I should not deserve the name of a Christian, and much less that of a minister and an apostle. Hear this, all ye who vainly hope to keep in favour both with God and with the world! And let all those ministers especially observe it, who either alter or conceal the doctrines of the gospel, for fear of displeasing their hearers, or to gain popularity.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. [Paul’s enemies accused him of being a time-serving, man-pleasing factionist, who, to gain for himself a large party of adherents, had allowed the Gentiles undue liberty, even receiving them into the fellowship of the church without subjecting them to the essential rite of circumcision, thus being content to let them rest in a low state of imperfection and perhaps even risk their salvation rather than alienate their affections by telling them unpalatable truths, or making unwelcome requirements. Paul therefore makes his present conduct an answer to all this. Neither in his present utterance or in his life since his conversion had he proved himself such a time-server. On the contrary, however, whenever a crisis arose requiring him to make a choice between pleasing man and God, he had spoken God’s unpleasant truths freely, regardless of their effect on human friendship. Whatever he had done when he was a Pharisee to please priest or people, he was not continuing to do so now. He was no longer a Jew, a Pharisee, or a persecutor of Christians as he would be if he were pleasing men, but he was a servant of Christ; though being so involved being misunderstood, hated, slandered, persecuted and reviled.] <\/p>\n

      Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Verse 10 <\/p>\n

      Persuade men; seek the favor of men.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      Week Two: 1:10-24 Paul’S Account Of His Qualifications To Present Truth <\/p>\n

      If you will remember in the pervious study, we saw that Paul was rather put out at the people for setting aside the gospel plainly given to them, for one that would call them unto and under the law. He is not particularly appreciative of the false teachers either, as he says let them be damned. <\/p>\n

      In this section he continues on by being rather plain of tongue as he reminds them that this gospel that he had taught was not of his making, but that it was the simple truth from God Himself – not an arrogant statement of who he was, but rather a plain and simple statement that they hadn’t forsaken his gospel, but that they had forsaken God’s gospel. <\/p>\n

      For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. <\/p>\n

      A simple statement that if Paul made people happy he then would not be serving Christ. Now, that is a mouth full from the man that should know. This man spent time with Christ, this man spent time walking the earth preaching Christ, and this man served only Christ. <\/p>\n

      What is the truth he conveys? If you are pleasing the lost, you aren’t serving Christ. Another way is to say if you are pleasing the lost you aren’t pleasing Christ. <\/p>\n

      My, how I would shudder if I were one of those pastors that had poled his community to see what they liked in a church and then designed a church to meet the “likes” of his community. They are pleasing the lost, thus one must wonder how they are pleasing Christ. <\/p>\n

      Ought we not see what Christ says about doing church and pattern our ministry after his thoughts rather than the thoughts of the lost? Do you think? This is not to say that these pastors don’t have numerical success, financial success, and at times even seemingly spiritual success, but how successful are you if you please not Christ? <\/p>\n

      I might make further comment – the term translated “please” relates to make excitement, and another phrase the Lexicon suggests is “to accommodate oneself to the opinions, desires and interests of others” – now if that doesn’t describe many today I don’t know what would. They mold themselves into whatever they think the lost might respond to so that the lost will feel comfortable in the church. <\/p>\n

      I think enough is said to make it clear that we ought to please and serve Christ and not our community. Many try to make their worship service palatable for the unbeliever. I suggested to one congregation that was only a few blocks from a large Catholic church and was surrounded by many Catholic families, that if we used this concept we would have to have mass on Sunday mornings – not an option that would please God, so why would having church the way pagans feel comfortable please Him? <\/p>\n

      Well, maybe just one more observation from this verse before we move on. It is obvious that pleasing men is in stark contrast to being the servant of Christ. The term translated “servant” has a very interesting contrast to be added to our discussion. It means to give up ones interest to another, or devoted to another to the disregard of one’s own interest. In relation to Christ, it is placing oneself to naught and doing all for Him. The contrast here is that these pastors are giving up their own interest to the lost, instead of to the Lord. <\/p>\n

      Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      1:10 {5} For do I now persuade {h} men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.<\/p>\n

      (5) A confirmation taken both from the nature of the doctrine itself, and also from the manner which he used in teachings. For neither, he says, did I teach those things which pleased men, as these men do who put part of salvation in external things, and works of the Law, neither went I about to procure any man’s favour. And therefore the matter itself shows that that doctrine which I delivered to you is heavenly.<\/p>\n

      (h) He refers to the false apostles, who had nothing but flattery in their mouths for men, and he, though he would not detract from the apostles, preaches God, and not to please men.<\/p>\n

      Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

      The false teachers evidently charged Paul with preaching to curry the favor of his listeners, perhaps to gain a large number of converts to enhance his own reputation. They could have charged him with preaching "easy believism" since he advocated faith in Christ alone for salvation.<\/p>\n

      "There have always been preachers who have sought popular acclaim above all else, and there are some still. It is part of fallen human nature that even those charged with the responsibility of proclaiming the gospel can fall into the trap of trying to be popular rather than faithful." [Note: Morris, p. 46.] <\/span><\/p>\n

      Paul’s critics may have accused him of preaching one thing to some people and the opposite to others (cf. Gal 5:2; Gal 5:11). It is understandable how some people might have concluded this (cf. 1Co 9:22). However, Paul’s argument in this verse was that a person can only be the slave of one master. Paul was claiming to have behaved among them consistent with his commitment to Christ as his master.<\/p>\n

      ". . . his uncompromising attitude as reflected in the severity of his language in condemning the counterfeit gospel (Gal 1:8 f.) is proof positive that he is no men-pleaser." [Note: Fung, p. 49.] <\/span><\/p>\n

      Paul liked to describe himself as a "bond-servant" (Greek doulos<\/span>) in relation to Christ (cf. Rom 1:1; Php 1:1; Tit 1:1). This Greek word also describes Moses (Jos 14:7; Rev 15:3), David (cf. Psa 89:3), Elijah (cf. 2Ki 10:10), and the Old Testament prophets (Rev 10:7; Rev 11:18). Moreover it describes Jesus Christ (Php 2:7), Christian leaders (2Ti 2:24), the apostles (2Co 4:5), James (Jas 1:1), Peter (2Pe 1:1), and Jude (Jud 1:1). Furthermore it describes John (Rev 1:1), Christians (Act 4:29; 1Co 7:22; Gal 4:7; Eph 6:6; 1Pe 2:16; Rev 1:1; Rev 2:20), Tribulation saints (Rev 7:3), and all believers (Rev 19:2; Rev 19:5; Rev 22:3; Rev 22:6) in the New Testament.<\/p>\n

      "Already in these opening verses the two key concepts in the letter have surfaced-gospel and grace." [Note: Timothy George, Galatians, p. 102.] <\/span><\/p>\n

      Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. 10. For do I now men, or God? ] The particle ‘for’ connects this verse with what precedes. ‘I speak thus decisively and strongly, for in … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Galatians 1:10”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29012","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29012","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29012"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29012\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29012"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29012"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29012"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}