5<\/strong>. To whom an hour<\/em> ] In some early copies the negative seems to have been omitted. “We yielded by a temporary concession”. This would of course imply that Titus was<\/em> circumcised. But the received reading is not to be disturbed.<\/p>\n the truth of the Gospel<\/em> ] The truth which is indeed good tidings that man is justified for the merit’s sake of Jesus Christ by faith, and not for his own works or deservings.<\/p>\n with you<\/em> ] Galatians, and with all other Gentile converts.<\/p>\n To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour – <\/B>We did not submit to this at all. We did not yield even for the shortest time. We did not waver in our opposition to their demands, or in the slightest degree become subject to their wishes. We steadily opposed their claims, in order that the great principle might be forever settled, that the laws of Moses were not to be imposed as obligatory on the Gentile converts. This I take to be the clear and obvious sense of this passage, though there has been a great variety of opinions on it. A considerable number of manuscripts omit the words <\/SPAN><\/span> hois oude), to whom neither (see Mill, Koppe, and Griesbach), and then the sense would be reversed, that Paul did yield to them for or after a short time, in order that he might in this way better consult the permanent interests of the gospel. This opinion has been gaining ground for the last century, that the passage here has been corrupted; but it is by no means confirmed. The ancient versions (the Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Arabic) accord with the usual reading of the text. So also do by far the largest portion of mss., and such, it seems to me, is the sense demanded by the connection. Paul means, in the whole passage, to say, that a great principle was settled. That the question came up fairly whether the Mosaic rites were to be imposed upon Gentile converts. That false brethren were introduced who demanded it; and that he steadily maintained his ground. He did not yield a moment. He felt that a great principle was involved; and though on all proper occasions he was willing to yield and to become all things to all men, yet here he did not court them, or temporize with them in the least. The phrase by subjection here means, that he did not suffer himself to be compelled to yield. The phrase for an hour is equivalent to the shortest period of time. He did not waver, or yield at all.<\/P> That the truth of the gospel might continue with you – <\/B>That the great principle of the Christian religion which had been taught you might continue, and that you might enjoy the full benefit of the pure gospel, without its being intermingled with any false views. Paul had defended these same views among the Galatians, and he now sought that the same views might be confirmed by the clear decision of the college of apostles at Jerusalem.<\/P><\/p>\n Gal 2:5<\/span><\/p>\n To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n The truth in the Church<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>If we would effectually promote the interests of Divine truth, we must take care, first of all, that we ourselves embrace it.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>And then, having embraced the truth, I would say, Contend earnestly for the truth–not in the spirit of party, not in the pride of reason, not with any secular motives, but because of its vitality and importance to the present and eternal well-being of man. And as the truth itself is but a modification of love, let your contention be in the spirit of love, seeking to reclaim those who are in error, in meekness and affection.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>And see to it, that it is the truth you are contending for. In essentials let not false charity or a spurious liberality lead you astray; there ought to be, there can be, no compromise of the one saving truth.<\/p>\n Pauls fearless independence<\/strong><\/p>\n No characteristic of the apostle is more marked than this. He went on his way unmoved alike by prejudiced and narrow-minded bigotry within the Church, or by armed and persecuting hostility without. Whether he is confronted with the worse than heathen libertinism that threatened to corrupt the Churches of Greece, or by the half-converted Pharisees who would have offered up the universality of the gospel to the prejudices of a sect; whether he stands before a Roman officer or before an infuriated mob; whether he is exposed to the sneers of a scoffer like Agrippa, or the sordid venality of an unjust judge like Felix–in all circumstances and under every temptation to make concessions to the prejudice or passions of those around him, Paul maintained an undaunted fearlessness of bearing, and stands forth with vigorous self-reliance, refusing to submit to the control of others his conviction of duty, refusing to swerve a hairsbreadth from the path his conscience marks out for him. (Prof. Robertson<\/em> Smith.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The reasons and consequences of Pauls resistance<\/strong><\/p>\n There are some who may see in this resolute attitude the inevitable egotism of a strong will and a clear purpose; but it is more reasonable to discover in such a temper an unshaken conviction in the reality of his mission, and a distinct persuasion that this mission was to be fulfilled in one way on!y, and by those specific means which he had been already adopting. And to us, who can understand the effect of this uncompromising temper upon the history of Christianity, it is manifest that the apostles persistency is the reason why Christianity did not become a mere Jewish School, which might have had a faint existence in the Ana<\/em> of some Talmud or Cabbala; or would, more probably, have been completely lost in the general havoc of the Jewish war. As it is, the teaching of the Pharisee of Tarsus has given method to modern civilization, has erected Christianity into a social system, and has constituted a standard by which the Christian system has been measured and reformed. (Paul<\/em> of<\/em> Tarsus.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Prompt opposition to error<\/strong><\/p>\n Some years ago I was amused with the sentiment of a witty fellow who said, A lie will travel from Maine to Georgia while truth is putting on his boots. In that case, he added, truth should not stop to put on his boots. The difficulty lies in allowing the lie to run so far ahead; let them start abreast, and truth will gain the field. It may be distanced at the first heat, but on the long run it is sure to secure the prize. (Cangray.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Strict faithfulness<\/strong><\/p>\n The other day I received a communication from a lawyer, who says that a very large owner has discovered that a very small piece of property belongs to him, and not to the small proprietor in whose possession it has for a very long time remained. The matter seemed a trifling one. We had a conference, and there came the steward with the lawyers, and he was furnished with maps, and putting on his spectacles, examined them with great care. Why? It was a small matter to him, but because he was a steward he was expected to be faithful. And when he found that this small piece of ground belonged to his lord he was determined to have it. So let me say–as stewards of the gospel of God–never give up one verse, one doctrine, one word of the truth of God. Let us be faithful to that committed to us, it is not ours to alter. We have but to declare that which we have received. (S. Cook,<\/em> D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n No terms with error<\/strong><\/p>\n During the Spartan war against Xerxes, the Athenians were entreated not to abandon their natural allies, and leave Greece to be enslaved. Pointing to the sun, Aristides replied, While that sun holds his course, we will come to no terms with Xerxes. For you, Spartans, our character might have raised us above your fears. The earth contains not the gold, nor does the sun shine upon the land that could move our purpose. Even with such unshaken courage and faithfulness must Christians fight against the enemies of the gospel of Christ. (R. Brewin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n No surrender<\/strong><\/p>\n To authorize generals, or other officers, to lay down their arms in virtue of a capitulation affords a dangerous latitude (except when they compose the garrison of a fortress). It is destructive of all military character in a nation to open such a door to the cowardly, the weak, or even the misdirected brave. Great extremities require extraordinary resolution. The more obstinate the resistance of an army, the greater the chances of assistance or success. How many seeming impossibilities have been accomplished by men whose only resource was death! (Maxim<\/em> LXVII.<\/em>)<\/p>\n In the campaign of 1759 Frederick directed General Pink, with 18,000 men, upon Maxen, for the purpose of cutting off the Austrian army from the defiles of Bohemia. Surrounded by twice his numbers, Pink capitulated after a sharp action, and 14,000 men laid down their arms. This conduct was the more disgraceful, because General Winch, who commanded the cavalry, cut his way through the enemy. The whole blame of the surrender fell, therefore, upon Pink, who was afterwards tried by a court-martial, and sentenced to be cashiered and imprisoned for two years.<\/p>\n Verse 5<\/span>. To whom we gave place by subjection<\/B><\/I>] So fully satisfied was he with his Divine call, and that he had in preaching among the Gentiles acted in strict conformity to it, that he did not submit in the least to the opinion of those Judaizing teachers; and therefore he continued to insist on the exemption<\/I> of the Gentiles from the necessity of submitting to Jewish rites; that the truth of the Gospel<\/I>-this grand doctrine, that the Gentiles are admitted by the Gospel of Christ to be fellow-heirs with the Jews, might continue<\/I>; and thus the same doctrine is continued with you<\/I> Gentiles.<\/P><\/p>\n To these Judaizing Christians the apostle did not think fit to yield one jot, not for the least time, nor in so much as one precedent; having a desire that these Gentile churches might not be perverted. Or, (as others think), to which men of reputation<\/I> we yielded not in the least. It is very probable, that Peter and James, upon their first arguing the case, to avoid the scandal and offence of the Jews, would have had Titus circumcised: St. Paul would not yield to it, that he might preserve the doctrine of the gospel, which he had planted amongst the Galatians, and other Gentiles, pure, and not encumber those churches with the Mosaical rites. But the most and best interpreters rather judge the persons here mentioned, to whom Paul would not yield, to be some Judaizing Christians, rather than the persons of reputation, <\/I>mentioned Gal 2:2<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n 5.<\/B> Greek,<\/I> “To whomnot even for an hour did we yield by subjection.” ALFORDrenders the Greek<\/I> article, “with<\/I> THEsubjection required of us.” The sense rather is, We wouldwillingly have yielded for love<\/I> [BENGEL](if no principle was at issue), but not in the way of subjection,<\/I>where “the truth of the Gospel” (Gal 2:14<\/span>;Col 1:5<\/span>) was at stake (namely,the fundamental truth of justification by faith only, without theworks of the law, contrasted with another Gospel, Ga1:6<\/span>). Truth precise, unaccommodating, abandons nothing thatbelongs to itself, admits nothing that is inconsistent with it[BENGEL]. <\/P> might continue withyou<\/B>Gentiles. We defended for your sakes your true faith andliberties, which you<\/I> are now renouncing.<\/P><\/p>\n To whom we gave place by subjection<\/strong>,…. Meaning not the apostles, elders, and brethren at Jerusalem, who did not insist upon the observance of the rituals of the law as necessary, but were one and all of opinion that the Gentiles should be free from them; but the false teachers with whom they combated, and would not yield in the least unto, so as to be brought into subjection to their impositions, nor suffer others to yield unto them:<\/p>\n no, not for an hour<\/strong>; for the least space of time, knowing what advantages and improvements would be made of it, should they allow of the use of these things as necessary for any short time, though it should be agreed then to drop them. This is a way of speaking used by the Jews, when they would express their steady adherence to any principle or practice; of which take the following instance from Gamaliel c:<\/p>\n “it happened to Rabban Gamaliel, that he read the first night he was married; his disciples said to him, master, hast thou not taught us, that the bridegroom is free from reading the Shema, i.e. “hear, O Israel”, c. the first night? he replied to them, I will not hearken to you to cause to cease from me the yoke of the kingdom of heaven,<\/p>\n , “even one hour”.”<\/p>\n The reason why the apostle, and others with him, were so resolute and pertinacious in this matter was,<\/p>\n that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you<\/strong> with the Galatians in particular, and with all the Gentiles in general, which otherwise would have been in danger of being entirely removed from them, at least of being adulterated and mixed with the Mosaic rites, and the inventions of men; whereas the apostle’s desire was, that, the Gospel might be continued with them genuine, sincere, and unmixed, in opposition to the shadows of the law, and the false doctrines of men.<\/p>\n c Misn. Beracot, c. 2. sect. 5.<\/p>\n No, not for an hour <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Pointed denial that he and Barnabas yielded at all “in the way of subjection” ( <\/SPAN><\/span>, in the subjection demanded of them). The compromisers pleaded for the circumcision of Titus “because of the false brethren” in order to have peace. The old verb <\/SPAN><\/span>, to yield, occurs here alone in the N.T. See 2Co 9:13<\/span> for <\/SPAN><\/span>.<\/P> The truth of the gospel <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). It was a grave crisis to call for such language. The whole problem of Gentile Christianity was involved in the case of Titus, whether Christianity was to be merely a modified brand of legalistic Judaism or a spiritual religion, the true Judaism (the children of Abraham by faith). The case of Timothy later was utterly different, for he had a Jewish mother and a Greek father. Titus was pure Greek. <\/P> <\/p>\n We gave place by subjection [ ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. We, Paul and Barnabas. Gave place or yielded, N. T. o By the subjection which was demanded of us. The noun only in Paul and the Pastorals, and always in the sense of self – subjection. Comp. 2Co 9:13<\/span>; 1Ti 2:11<\/span>; 1Ti 3:4<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour,”<\/strong> (dis oude pros horan eksamen to huptoge) “To whom we yielded in subjection, not even for an hour; The “we” referred to were specifically Paul, Barnabas, and Titus as there was no small disputation in that Antioch encounter, Act 15:21<\/span><\/p>\n 2) “That the truth of the gospel,”<\/strong> (hina he aletheia tou euangeliou) “in order that the truth of the gospel,” or the gospel of truth. Gal 2:14<\/span>; Gal 3:1<\/span>; Joh 14:6<\/span>; 1Co 15:1-3<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “Might continue with you,”<\/strong> (diameine pros humas) might remain, abide, or continue with you all,” the truth that salvation is by the Grace of God, thru faith in Jesus Christ, not thru ceremonial works of the Law of Moses, Gal 2:16<\/span>; Eph 2:8-10<\/span>.<\/p>\n What Paul, Barnabas, and Timothy had preached on the Gentile mission field in Asia Minor and Galatia and Cilicia and Syria they also boldly defended both at Antioch and in Jerusalem, though confronted by contentious false brethren. Paul was always set for the peril of the “defense of the gospel” whether among friends or foe, a noble Christian trait to be sought after by all true followers of Jesus Christ, Php_1:17; So was Jude, Jud 1:3<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n 5 . To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour. This steadiness was the seal of Paul’s doctrine. For when false brethren, who wished nothing more than a ground of accusation against him, exerted themselves to the utmost, and he stood firm, there could no longer be any room for doubt. It cannot now be insinuated that he deceived the apostles. He asserts that he did not for a moment give place to them by subjection, that is, by such a mode of yielding as would have implied that his liberty had been crushed. In every other respect, he was prepared, to the very close of his life, to exercise mildness and forbearance toward all men. <\/p>\n That the truth of the gospel. There was no danger that Paul would be deprived of his liberty even by yielding to them; but the example would have done harm to others, and therefore he prudently inquired what was expedient. This shows us how far offenses must be avoided, and points us to edification as the object which ought to be kept in view in all matters of indifference. The amount, is this: “We are the servants of the brethren, but still keeping in view that we all serve the Lord, and that the liberty of our conscience shall remain unimpaired.” When false brethren wished to bring the saints in to bondage, it was their duty not to yield to them. <\/p>\n The truth of the gospel denotes its genuine purity, or, which means the same thing, its pure and entire doctrine. For the false apostles did not altogether set aside the gospel, but mixed up with it their own notions, so as to give it a false and disguised aspect, which it always has when we make the smallest departure “from the simplicity that is in Christ.” (2Co 11:3<\/span>.) <\/p>\n With what effrontery then will the Papists boast that they possess the gospel, which is not only corrupted by many inventions, but more than adulterated by many wicked doctrines? Let us remember that it is not enough to retain the name of the gospel, and some kind of summary of its doctrines, if its solid purity do not remain untouched. Where are the men who, by pretended moderation, endeavor to bring about a reconciliation between us and the Papists? as if the doctrine of religion, like a matter affecting money or property, could be compromised. With what abhorrence would such a transaction have been regarded by Paul, who affirms that it is not the true gospel, if it is not pure! <\/p>\n (5) To whom<\/strong>i.e.,<\/em> to the Jewish agitators, though probably not so much in their own persons as through the Apostles who advocated concession to their views.<\/p>\n We gave place.<\/strong>St. Paul himself, with Barnabas and Titus.<\/p>\n By subjection.<\/strong>By yielding to them the submission which they claimed of us.<\/p>\n No, not for an hour.<\/strong>It is strange that the negative here and the relative at the beginning of the verse are wanting in some Latin authorities, including Irenus and (partially, at least) Tertullian. This, however, is only interesting as pointing to a very early corruption of the text, and not for any bearing that it has on the exegesis of the passage.<\/p>\n The truth of the gospel.<\/strong>The gospel in its true form, with all the liberty which its essential doctrine of justification by faith involves, not mutilated or restricted by any false conditions.<\/p>\n Might continue with you.<\/strong>The words used in the Greek are expressive of undiminished continuance: Might reach to you and persist among you in its full extent.<\/p>\n 5<\/strong>. <\/strong> We<\/strong> The delegation from Antioch. To the apostles and the orthodox Church there was a deference; but these factionists demanded subjection<\/strong>, which was not yielded an hour<\/strong>. The very truth of the gospel <\/strong> was at stake. <\/p>\n You<\/strong> Galatians and all other Gentile Christians.<\/p>\n ‘To whom we gave place in the way of subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you.’<\/p>\n Paul stresses that he, Barnabas and Titus had had no doubts about the matter. There was no wavering of mind, for they knew that the whole basis of the Gospel depended on it. They would not give way to legalists.<\/p>\n ‘That the truth of the Gospel might continue with you.’ This would seem to mean that he is trying to preserve the truth for such as the Galatians rather than letting it be perverted, so that what they would believe would continue to be the truth. Alternately he may be arguing that if the truth were not preserved the ministry to the Gentiles would just die out. They would not continue in it. Either was true.<\/p>\n Gal 2:5<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>To whom we gave place, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> The neither <\/em>in the 3rd verse, according to propriety of speech, ought to have an or <\/em>to answer it; and accordingly, in this verse, the word should be so rendered, Neither was Titus compellednor did we yield to them a moment. <\/em>The point which those false brethren <\/em>contended for was, that the law of Moses was to be kept. See Act 15:5<\/span>. St. Paul, who, upon other occasions, was so condescending that to the Jews he became as a Jew, <\/em>&c. 1Co 9:19-22<\/span> yet when subjection to the law was claimed as due in any case, he would not yield in the least matter. This appears to be the meaning of the expression, we gave not place by subjection; <\/em>for where compliance was desired of him, upon account of expediency, <\/em>and not of subjection <\/em>to the law, we do not find him stiff and inflexible; as may be seen, Act 21:18-26<\/span> which was after the writing of this Epistle. In the next clause of this verse he gives us the reason why he yielded not to those Judaizing false brethren: it was, that the true doctrine which he had preached to the Gentiles, or their freedom from thelaw, might stand firm: a convincing argument to the Galatians that he preached not circumcision. See Gal 2:14<\/span> and ch. Gal 3:1<\/span>. Dr. Heylin connects this and the 4th verse in the following manner, Gal 2:4<\/span>. And as to the false brethren, who insidiously crept in to spy out our liberty, <\/em>&c. Gal 2:5<\/span>. I would not yield to them by subjection, <\/em>&c. “Much had been done on several occasions,” says this writer, “in condescension to weakness, and from the motive of charity; but when things indifferent were required absolutely, and as a necessary subjection, then St. Paul resisted, as became him.” <\/p>\n Gal 2:5<\/span> . Connection:<\/em> “ On account of the false brethren, however<\/em> , Titus was not compelled to be circumcised; to these we did not yield even for an hour<\/em> . Had we consented to the suggestion, which was made to us by Christians at Jerusalem (see on Gal 2:3<\/span> ), at least to circumcise Titus, we should have thereby yielded to the false brethren standing in the background, who declared the circumcision of Gentile Christians to be necessary; but this did not at all take place.” [70]<\/p>\n ] in the sense of . See Stallbaum, ad Phil<\/em> . p. 195 f.; Khner, ad Xen. Mem<\/em> . i. 1. 64; Ellendt, Lex. Soph<\/em> . II. p. 371.<\/p>\n ] not even for an hour<\/em> , indicating a very short duration of time. Comp. 2Co 7:8<\/span> ; Phm 1:15<\/span> ; Joh 5:35<\/span> ; 1Th 2:17<\/span> ; also , Wis 18:12 ; , , and the like.<\/p>\n ] namely, I and Barnabas and Titus.<\/p>\n ] belongs not to (Matthias), an inverted arrangement which would be without motive, but to , beside which it stands: “through the obedience claimed by the false brethren,” that is, by rendering to them the obedience which they desired<\/em> . On the matter itself, see Act 15:1<\/span> ; Act 15:5<\/span> . Matthies regards as an appositional explanation of (as to this usage, see Fritzsche, Diss. in 2 Cor<\/em> . II. p. 135 f.). But the yielding takes place not to the obedience, but to the demand ( ). Fritzsche correctly takes it in an ablative sense, but explains, “eo obsequio praestito, quod apostoli postularent<\/em> .” But in combination with , and with . preceding, it would not occur to the reader to think of anything else than the obedience claimed by<\/em> the . Besides, it was not the apostles at all who demanded the circumcision of Titus, but (see on Gal 2:3<\/span> ) Christians at Jerusalem, acting on the instigation of the , so that these latter<\/em> would have been obeyed by the circumcision in question. Comp. the state of matters at Act 21:21<\/span> . Holsten, without any indication of support in the context, interprets: “by the subordination to the<\/em> , which had been demanded by the false brethren.” Lastly, Hermann (who is followed by Bretschneider), entirely in opposition to the context, explains it, “quibus ne horae quidem spatium Jesu obsequio<\/em> segnior fui.”<\/p>\n . . .] Object<\/em> of this non-compliance at that time, which, although in the nature of the case it concerned Pauline Christians generally, is represented concretely as referring to the Galatians: “in order that the truth of the gospel may abide with you;<\/em> in order that by our conduct the principle of Christian freedom should not be shaken, and ye should not be induced to deviate from the truth, which forms the subject-matter of the gospel (Gal 2:14<\/span> ; Col 1:5<\/span> ), by mixing it up with Mosaism” (comp. , Gal 1:6<\/span> ). A purpose, therefore and this the readers were intended to feel to which their present apostasy entirely ran counter!<\/p>\n ] as , Gal 1:18<\/span> , comp. 1Co 16:7<\/span> ; here also it is not the with<\/em> of simple rest, but expresses the relation of an active bearing on life; Bernhardy, p. 265. Besides, Paul might justly say , as the Galatians were for the most part Gentile Christians<\/em> , and in that opposition to the false brethren it was the freedom of the Gentile Christians which he sought to maintain. The individualizes the readers of the letter (Gal 3:26<\/span> , Gal 4:6<\/span> ; Col 1:25<\/span> ; Eph 3:2<\/span> , and frequently). The reference to the yet unconverted<\/em> Gentiles, whom the truth of the gospel had still to reach<\/em> ( ), as suggested by Hofmann, [71] is in complete opposition to the text.<\/p>\n ] permaneret<\/em> ; denoting the abiding<\/em> continuance. The truth which they have received was not again to be lost. Heb 1:11 ; 2Pe 3:4<\/span> ; Luk 22:8<\/span> ; and frequently in Greek authors.<\/p>\n [70] Paul was therefore by no means “ nearly<\/em> compelled to have Titus circumcised” (Hilgenfeld in his Zeitschr<\/em> . 1860, p. 121).<\/p>\n [71] Comp. Windischmann.<\/p>\n Note<\/em> .<\/p>\n As by the (Gal 2:4-5<\/span> ) cannot be meant the Judaizers at work among the Galatians<\/em> (which is assumed by Fritzsche entirely in opposition to the connection), but only the same persons mentioned in Act 15:1<\/span> ; Act 15:5<\/span> ; they cannot be described as false<\/em> brethren in relation to any one particular church<\/em> ( e.g<\/em> . to the church of Antioch<\/em> , into which they had crept from Jerusalem<\/em> , as Baur and Reiche think). On the contrary, the general form of their antagonism, Gal 2:4-5<\/span> , as well as the further account in Gal 2:7-10<\/span> , and the whole argument of the epistle, admit only of one point of view, that the apostle, out of the certainty of the , styles them false brethren in relation to Christianity generally<\/em> , of which they had, as regards their Judaizing character and action looked at from a Pauline standpoint, falsely pretended to be professors. This does not in itself exclude the fact that they had come from Jerusalem to Antioch (Act 15:1<\/span> ). The inflexible opposition offered to them by the apostle in Jerusalem doubtless contributed much to the bringing about of the apostolic decree. Comp. Mrcker, l.c<\/em> . p. 539.<\/p>\n DISCOURSE: 2054 Gal 2:5<\/span>. To whom we. gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you<\/em>.<\/p>\n NEVER, from the foundation of the world, was there, as far as we know, a richer combination of graces in any child of man, than in the Apostle Paul. As in light there is an assemblage of very different rays, which, when in due proportion and in simultaneous motion, cause that bright and pure effulgence which we call light, so in him were found dispositions most opposed to each other, yet so combined as to form in him the most perfect character. Certainly, that which first of all strikes us as constituting the chief trait in his character, is a freedom from all selfish feelings, and a willingness to do or suffer any thing whereby man may be benefited, and God be glorified. Yet, in the passage which we have just read, we see, not only an inflexibility of mind, but such an expression of it as we should scarcely have expected from so mild and kind a man. Now, that this inflexibility of his may be duly appreciated, I will shew,<\/p>\n I.<\/p>\n When pertinacity may be considered as unamiable and sinful<\/p>\n To be zealously affected always in a good thing<\/em> is commendable [Note: Gal 4:18<\/span>.]: but zeal may be misplaced, and especially when it operates so far as to make a man inflexible. A bold, confident, dogmatical spirit, is at all times unamiable; and especially,<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n When the object in dispute is questionable or indifferent<\/p>\n [Some there are, who, on every subject, speak as if they were infallible; and not only claim, what must be conceded to them, a right to think and act for themselves, but a right to impose on others also a necessity to comply with their mind and will. At all events, they themselves are immoveable on almost any subject upon which they have formed even the most hasty opinion: and, if they tolerate, they will never adopt, the sentiments opposed to them. Such were the dispositions manifested by many in the Apostles days, especially in reference to some ordinances of the Jewish law; such as the observance of certain days, and the eating of meats offered to idols. So confident were the opposite parties, that, not content with following their own judgment, they each condemned the practice of the other; the strong despising the weak, and the weak sitting in judgment on the strong [Note: Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I. <\/strong>The truth of the gospel is essentially embodied in the doctrinal articles, and the devotional services, of the Church of England. Her basis is the Word of God. There is no one truth contained in the Bible which does not appear interwoven in her services; and, what is of vast importance, those truths are every one of them brought forward throughout her ecclesiastical year with a distinctness, and yet with a beautiful consistency and harmony, according to the analogy of the faith.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>The reformers, both in their lives and by their deaths, evinced a deep anxiety that the truth of the gospel, by means of a scriptural Church, might continue with us.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>It becomes us their children, blessed with such privileges, to be alive to the importance of maintaining the truth of the gospel, and handing it down unimpaired to posterity. Gratitude demands this at our hands; the mercy of God in the bestowment of these blessings, and the salvation of souls which is so closely bound up in them, enforce this duty upon us. If religion be anything, it is everything. And surely, if men be anxious and persevering and brave in securing temporal freedom and national liberty, oh! shall the Christian, actuated by the love of Christ, the most constraining principle, be afraid, or unwilling, or indifferent, to perpetuate the truth which sets free the immortal spirit, and obtain, so far as human instrumentality can, the blessings of salvation to children yet unborn?<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>The education of the young in the principles of Divine truth, as embodied and taught in the formularies of the Church, must commend itself as a means at once simple and efficient. (Joseph<\/em> Haslegrave,<\/em> M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
CHRISTIAN AND UNCHRISTIAN PERTINACITY<\/strong><\/p>\n
When he was at Jerusalem, attended by a young disciple, named Titus, he was urged to have him circumcised; not for the purpose of removing prejudice, and gaining an easier access to the minds of men, but from an idea, that the observance of that rite was necessary to the completion of Christianity, and to the attainment of the Gospel salvation. To such advisers he would not listen for a moment. Whatever might be their rank or influence in the Church, he regarded them not as deserving the slightest deference from him on such a subject [Note: See ver. 6.]; since a compliance with their wishes would vitiate, and altogether invalidate, the Gospel of Christ.<\/p>\n