John Brown - Page 73

That the apostles were not dissatisfied with that part of Paul's doctrine which was peculiarly obnoxious to the Judaising teachers, ' that gentile converts were not bound to be circumcised or submit to the Mosaic law,' was made very evident by their conduct in reference to Titus. "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty with we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you." The construction of this paragraph is a little involved. Some, following a different reading from our translation, have in rendering it ;left out "no, not" in the 5th verse. They suppose that Titus was circumcised, and that the apostle is explaining the circumstance. Titus was not compelled to be circumcised, but he (Paul) acted on principles similar to those on which he took and circumcised Timothy. It is a very important remark of Dr Paley, that "whenever Paul's compliance with the Jewish law is mentioned in the history of the Acts of the Apostles, it is mentioned in connection with circumstances which point out the motives from which it proceeded, and this motive seems always exoteric, namely, a love of order and tranquillity, or an unwillingness to give unnecessary offence."