Galatians 4:15

Gal_4:15

Where is then the blessedness ye spake of?

Instability

I. Their past religious experience was one of blessedness.

1. Blessedness is one of the earliest notes of religious life. Christs first miracle was at Cana: amongst His first words were the beatitudes. The earliest religious experience is that known as first love.

2. There is a danger of this being lost through the truth on which it is based losing its freshness. The vision of Christ crucified had faded, and the Galatians were now seeking perfection in another way than that by which they had attained blessedness.

3. Blessedness can only be maintained by the constant realization of Christ as Saviour.

II. Their present example is one of religious instability.

1. They were of a fickle and changeable temperament.

2. Religion had entered them chiefly through the emotions. They had not fairly grasped the doctrines of Christianity. Hence they became an easy prey to false teachers.

3. They regarded the teacher rather than the truth he taught.

4. Influences were at work calculated to draw them away from their faith.

(1) Learned teachers whom it was hard to refute.

(2) Gorgeous ceremonial for which they had a predilection.

(3) Old worldliness and heathenism so recently renounced.

III. The remedy.

1. Recognize the evil.

2. Return to Christ. (S. Pearson, M. A.)

A missing treasure

1. Nothing is easier than to show that blessedness is the privilege of every Christian.

2. But where is it in many an average Christian life?

3. If it be amissing, something must be wrong.

4. Its sole source is God, but it is dispensed at sundry places and by sundry channels.

I. The Cross of Christ. By this

(1) a curse is removed;

(2) a blessing conferred.

II. The throne of grace.

1. A reconciled God

2. A sympathetic High Priest.

III. The wells of salvation.

1. The Bible.

2. The Lords Supper.

IV. The ways of Christian good-doing (Act_20:35).

V. Mount Pisgah, with its views of the promised land. When all is gloomy elsewhere, all is bright there (Joh_14:1-3; Rom_8:18-21; Heb_12:22-24; Rev_22:1-5). In conclusion, where is this blessedness?

1. How strange not to have it!

2. Stranger still to have had it and lost it. (Norman Macleod, D. D.)

Happiness and duty

I. To make happiness the chief end of life is a mistake as well as a sin, for it must meet with failure.

II. The end of our being is holiness: and when this is attained, happiness is the certain result.

III. The blessedness of religion is the outward and visible sign of the inward and invisible grace, just as good health is a token that our physical employments are conducive to our well being,

1. Those forms of religion which induce melancholy bear no stamp of Divine origin.

2. Mans greatest miseries have been produced by such a religion.

3. Happiness shows the worth of true religion, for the fruit of the Spirit is joy. (S. Pearson, M. A.)

Blessedness

is not the foundation or warrant of Christian life, but its crown and glory, like the tuft of green that adorns the palm tree: like the rich capital that wreathes the Corinthian column; like the crown that sparkles on the brow of a king. Without it the Christian is like a king without a crown, a column without a capital, a palm tree with a headless stem, (N. Macleod, D. D.)

Mere feeling: its worthlessness

Feeling, even when directed to heavenly objects, may be in its substance partly physical; and there is no necessary connection between feeling so originating and moral earnestness or right morality. Nay, it is very possible for those who feel warmly to imagine, mistakenly enough, that warm feeling is the same thing as, or an adequate substitute for, acting rightly. He who said, If ye love Me, keep My commandments, implied that there are forms of religious passion which may co-exist with disobedience, and may even appear to compensate for it. The Galatians had not been less willing to pluck out their own eyes out of devotion to St. Paul, at the time of their conversion, because they afterwards looked on him as a personal enemy for telling them the truth about the Judaizers. The apostle was not insincere who protested, Though I should die with Thee, yet will I not deny Thee; albeit a few hours later, at the crisis of danger, he could exclaim, I know not the man. Feeling is not necessarily moral purpose; and its possible deficiencies show that we cannot regard it as alone forming the material of Christian life. (Canon Liddon.)

Feeling: its place and power in religion

Feeling is of as much use in religion as steam is in an engine--if it drives the engine it is good; but if it does not it is no good for anything but to fizz and hiss and buzz. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Lost blessedness

At the Governors banquet in California State, where wine was flowing freely, one of the speakers, while making an excited speech, said: If there is any one present who was ever happier in his life than he is here to-night, I call upon him at once to arise and say so. A young man sprang to his feet and said: I was very much happier in one of Mr. Hammonds meetings than I am here. it produced a profound impression upon that gay audience.

The backsliders misery

A number of persons were once relating their misfortunes to each other. One told of his whole substance entrusted to one vessel, having perished in the ocean; another of an only and beloved daughter recently ]aid in the grave; another of a son breaking loose from restraint, and plunging like the prodigal into the wickedness of a great city. It was agreed that these were sore afflictions, and it was wondered whether any could produce sorer. One who had hitherto been silent now spoke. Yes, said he, I can tell of something sadder than all these, a believing heart has gone from me. There followed deep silence at thess words, and when the little group spoke again it was agreed that the last was the heaviest sorrow; that there was no calamity like it. (British Messenger.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal 4:15-16. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of — On which ye so congratulated one another? Since ye once thought yourselves so happy in my presence with, and my preaching among you, how happens it that you are now so alienated from me? For if it had been possible — If it had been a thing allowable, and I could have received any benefit by it; ye would have plucked out your eyes, and have given them to me — As a convincing proof of your affection for me. Am I become your enemy — Or have you any reason to account me such; because I tell you the truth? — And bear a faithful testimony to the uncorrupted gospel, which I desire to maintain among you in all the purity in which I planted it? “The apostle’s address, in thus putting the Galatians in mind of their former affection and gratitude to him, as their spiritual father, and his contrasting it in this verse with their present temper of mind, is admirable.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4:15 The Galatians had been joyful and grateful in response to Paul’s preaching of the Good News. • your own eyes: Some conclude from this phrase that Paul’s eyes were diseased, but Paul might have been using eyes as a word-picture of a precious asset (cp. Deut 32:10; Ps 17:8; Matt 18:9). In their gratitude to Paul for the message of good news, the Galatians would have . . . given him their most valuable possession.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Gal 4:15. Μακαρισμὸς) Μακαρισμὸς is an expression derived from μακαρίζω [I congratulate]. You were thankful for [You congratulated yourselves on account of] the Gospel, and for me its messenger: what cause was there for this thankfulness [congratulation of yourselves], if you now treat me with disdain?[38]—ὀφθαλμοὺς, eyes) very dear.

[38] ἐδώκατέ μοι, you would have given me) You would thus testify a grateful mind, on the ground that you obtained so great blessedness through me. That spontaneous affection is not to be looked for on the part of any mere mercenary.—V. g.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal_4:15. Of what nature, then, was your self-congratulation? A sorrowful question! for the earnestness with which the Galatians had then congratulated themselves on the apostles account, contrasting so sadly with their present circumstances, compelled him to infer that that congratulation was nothing but an effervescent, fleeting, and fickle excitement. Hence the reading ποῦ οὖν (see the critical notes) is a gloss in substance correct; comp. Rom_3:27. Others explain it: On what was your self-congratulation grounded? Why did you pronounce yourselves so happy? So Bengel, Koppe, Winer, Matthias, and Schott.[196] In this case qualis would have to be taken in the peculiar sense: how caused, which, however, would require to be distinctly suggested by the context. Others still, as Erasmus, Luther, Beza, Piscator, Calovius, Wolf, and including Baumgarten-Crusius, Hilgenfeld, Reiche, Wieseler, interpret: How great (comp. Eph_1:14) therefore was your congratulation! how very happy you pronounced yourselves! But then the ὥστε in Gal_4:16 would be deprived of its logical reference, which, according to our interpretation, is contained in τίς οὖν ὁ μακαρ. ὑμ. And the words would, in fact, contain merely a superfluous and feeble exclamation.

The μακαρισμός (comp. Rom_4:6; Rom_4:9), with which ὑμῶν stands as the genitive of the subject (comp. Plat. Rep. p. 590 D), and not as the genitive of the object (Matthias),for the object is obvious of itself,refers to the circumstance that they had congratulated themselves, not that they had been congratulated by Paul and others (Jerome, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius), or even that they (the Galatians) had congratulated the apostle (Estius, Locke, Michaelis). See the sequel. The word, synonymous with εὐδαιμονισμός, is never equivalent to μακαριότης (Erasmus, Luther, Piscator, Homberg, Calovius, comp. Olsh.).

μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν κ.τ.λ.] justification of the expression just used, ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν.

τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς κ.τ.λ.] A description of the overwhelming love, which was ready for any sacrifice. Such proverbial modes of expression, based upon the high value and indispensableness of the eyes (Pro_7:2; Psa_17:8; Zec_2:8; Mat_18:9; and comp. Vulpius and Doering, ad Catull. i. 3. 5), are current in all languages. Nevertheless, Lomler (in the Annal. d. gesammt. theol. Lit. 1831, p. 276), Rückert, and Schott have explained the passage quite literally: that Paul had some malady of the eyes, and here states that, if it had been possible, the Galatians would have given him their own sound eyes. But considering the currency of the proverbial sense, how arbitrarily is this view hazarded, seeing that nowhere else do we find a trace of any malady of the eyes in the apostle![197] Rückert and Schott, indeed, found specially on εἰ δυνατόν, and maintain that, to express the meaning of the ordinary view, Paul must have written: if it had been necessary. But in any case the idea was a purely imaginary one, and as a matter of fact practically impossible (ἀδύνατον); if Paul, therefore, had said: if it had been necessary, he would at any rate have expressed himself unsuitably. Besides, εἰ δυνατόν expresses the self-sacrificing love in a yet far stronger degree. And, if Paul had not spoken proverbially, the whole assurance would have been so hyperbolical, that he certainly could not have stood sponsor for it with the earnest μαρτυρῶ ὑμῖν.

ἐξορύξ.] the standing word for the extirpation of the eyes. See Jdg_16:21; 1Sa_11:2; Herod. viii. 116; Joseph. Antt. vi. 5. 1; Wetstein, in loc.

ἐδώκατέ μοι] namely, as property, as a love-pledge of the most joyful self-sacrificing devotedness, not for use (Hofmann, following older expositors),a view which, if we do not explain it of a disease of the eyes in the apostles case, leads to a monstrous idea. Without ἄν (see the critical notes) the matter is expressed as more indubitable, the condition contained in the protasis being rhetorically disregarded. See Hermann, ad Soph. El. 902; de part, ἄν, p. 70 ff.; Bremi, ad Lys. Exc. IV. p. 439 f.; Stallbaum, ad Plat. Symp. p. 198 C; Buttmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1858, p. 490. But Ellendt (Lex. Soph. I. p. 125) well remarks, Sed cavendum, ne in discrimine utriusque generis, quod pertenue est, constituendo argutemur.

[196] Schott, in opposition to the context, and all the more strangely seeing that he does not even read ἦν, but merely supplies it, lays stress upon this ἦν: illo tempore, nunc non item; comp. Oecumenius.

[197] Lomler and Schott trace back the alleged disease of the eyes to the blindness at Damascus, and identify it with the σκόλοψ (2Co_12:7). The latter idea is just as mistaken as the former. For the σκόλοψ was, in the apostles view, an operation of Satan, whereas the blindness at Damascus arose from the effulgence of the celestial Christ. And this blindness, as it had arisen supernaturally, was also supernaturally removed (Act_9:17-18). That a chronic malady of the eyes should have been left behind, would be entirely opposed to the analogy of the N.T. miracles of healing, of which a complete cure was always the characteristic.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal 4:15 . ποῦ οὖ … The MSS. are decisive in favour of ποῦ , which makes excellent sense. “You congratulated yourselves,” it is urged, “on my coming among you, you welcomed me as an angel, as Christ Himself: what has become of that feeling now? where is your satisfaction at your lot?” ἐδώκατε . Some MSS. insert αν before this verb: the addition would be necessary in Attic Greek to express the conditional force of the clause, but is not needed in Hellenistic Greek τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν . The full force of ὑμῶν may be given in English by the rendering your own eyes : for it lays stress on the contrast between their eyes and those of Paul. The addition is significant, and strongly confirms the view that his eyes were the organ specially affected by his malady.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

What a talk was there abroad in the world amongst men, how happy you were?

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Where, &c.--Of what value was your congratulation (so the Greek for "blessedness" expresses) of yourselves, on account of your having among you me, the messenger of the Gospel, considering how entirely you have veered about since? Once you counted yourselves blessed in being favored with my ministry.

ye would have plucked out your own eyes--one of the dearest members of the body--so highly did you value me: a proverbial phrase for the greatest self-sacrifice (Mat 5:29). CONYBEARE and HOWSON think that this particular form of proverb was used with reference to a weakness in Paul's eyes, connected with a nervous frame, perhaps affected by the brightness of the vision described, Act 22:11; Co2 12:1-7. "You would have torn out your own eyes to supply the lack of mine." The divine power of Paul's words and works, contrasting with the feebleness of his person (Co2 10:10), powerfully at first impressed the Galatians, who had all the impulsiveness of the Celtic race from which they sprang. Subsequently they soon changed with the fickleness which is equally characteristic of Celts.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 15. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of?] Ye spake of should be in italics, there being no corresponding word in the Greek text. Perhaps there is not a sentence in the New Testament more variously translated than this. I shall give the original: τις ουν ην ὁ μακαρισμος ὑμων· What was then your blessedness! Or, How great was your happiness at that time! Or, What blessings did ye then pour on me! It is worthy of remark, that, instead of τις, what, ABCFG, several others, the older Syriac, the later Syriac in the margin, the Armenian, Vulgate, one copy of the Itala, and some of the fathers, have που, where; and ην, was, is omitted by ACD, several others, also the Vulgate, Itala, and the Latin fathers. According to these authorities the text should be read thus: Where then is your blessedness? Having renounced the Gospel, you have lost your happiness. What have your false teachers given you to compensate the loss of communion with God, or that Spirit of adoption, that Spirit of Christ, by which you cried Abba, Father! If, however, we understand the words as implying the benedictions they then heaped on the apostle, the sense will be sufficiently natural, and agree well with the concluding part of the verse; for I bear you record, that, if possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me. You had then the strongest affection for me; you loved God, and you loved me for God's sake, and were ready to give me the most unequivocal proof of your love.

Dearer than one's eyes, or to profess to give one's eyes for the sake of a person, appears to have been a proverbial expression, intimating the highest tokens of the strongest affection. We find a similar form of speech in Terence, Adelphi, act iv., scene 5, ver. 67.

------------------------Di me pater

Omnes oderint, ni magis te quam oculos nunc ego amo meos.

"O father,

may all the gods hate me, if I do not love you now more than

my own eyes."

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

15. Where is there your blessedness? Paul had made them happy, and he intimates that the pious affection with which they formerly regarded him was an expression of their happiness. But now, by allowing themselves to be deprived of the services of him to whom they ought to have attributed whatever knowledge they possessed of Christ, they gave evidence that they were unhappy. This hint was intended to produce keen reflection. “What? Shall all this be lost? Will you forfeit all the advantage of having once heard Christ speaking by my lips? Shall the foundation in the faith which you received from me be to no purpose? Shall your falling away now destroy the glory of your obedience in the presence of God?” In short, by despising the pure doctrine which they had embraced, they throw away, of their own accord, the blessedness which they had obtained, and draw down upon themselves the destruction in which their unhappy career must terminate.

For I bear you record. It is not enough that pastors be respected, if they are not also loved; for both are necessary to make the doctrine they preach be fully relished; and both, the apostle declares, had existed among the Galatians. He had already spoken of their respect for him, and he now speaks of their love. To be willing to pluck out their own eyes, if it had been necessary, was an evidence of very extraordinary love, stronger than the willingness to part with life.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(15) Where.—The reading of the Received text is “What,” which, however, must be taken as if it were equivalent to “where,” the reading which has the strongest attestation.

The blessedness ye spake of.—The Greek is a single word: your felicitation of yourselves; your boast of blessedness; or (as we should say) your boasted blessedness. What has become of all those loud assertions in which you were once heard declaring yourselves “blest” in the presence of the Apostle?

For.—You did declare yourselves blest; for, &c.

Ye would have plucked out your own eyes.—The word “own” should be struck out, and the emphasis laid on “eyes.” The inference which has been drawn from this passage, that St. Paul suffered from an affection of the eyes, hardly seems to hold good. The “eyes” may be mentioned only as something peculiarly dear and precious. Comp. the Old Testament phrase, “to keep as the apple of an eye” (Deu_32:10; Psa_17:8; Pro_7:2).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

15. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of] The last three words are not in the original. They are a paraphrase (and so an interpretation) of the genitive of the 2nd personal pronoun. Does this genitive express the object or the subject of the noun rendered ‘blessedness’? This noun occurs Rom_4:6. Here it may either mean ‘your blessedness’ (as A.V.), the blessedness which you experienced in embracing the Gospel of justification by faith apart from the works of the law. Or it may mean, your applause of me. On the whole the former is to be preferred, as bearing on the general argument of the Epistle. The latter is however in full accordance with the immediate context.

your own eyes] Rather, your eyes. Some have inferred from the A.V. that St Paul was suffering from loss of eyesight. But the emphasis is not on ‘your’ but on ‘eyes’. ‘There is no sacrifice which you were not ready to make to shew your zeal and affection towards me’.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Am I therefore become your enemy,.... Not that he was an enemy to them, he had the same cordial affection for them as ever; he had their true interest at heart, and was diligently pursuing it; but they, through the insinuations of the false teachers, had entertained an ill opinion of him, and an aversion to him, and treated him as if he had been an enemy to them, and as if they had a real hatred of him: and that for no other reason, as he observes, but

because I tell you the truth; the Gospel so called, because it comes from the God of truth, is concerned with Christ, who is truth itself, and is dictated, revealed, and blessed by the Spirit of truth; and is opposed unto, and is distinct from the law, which is only an image and shadow, and not truth itself: it chiefly respects the great truths of salvation alone by Christ, and justification by his righteousness; and may also regard what he had said concerning the abrogation of the law, blaming them for the observance of it, and calling its institutions weak and beggarly elements; all which he told or spoke publicly, plainly, honestly, fully, and faithfully, boldly, constantly, and with all assurance, consistently, and in pure love to their souls; and yet it brought on him their anger and resentment. Telling the truth in such a manner often brings many enemies to the ministers of Christ; not only the men of the world, profane sinners, but professors of religion, and sometimes such who once loved and admired them.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

Ver. 15. Where is then the blessedness] q.d. There was a time when ye held yourselves happy in me, and blessed the time that ever ye saw and heard me. {a} Is the change now in me or in yourselves? Thus the Jews rejoiced in John for a season, but he soon grew stale to them, Joh 5:35. See the note there. Neutrum modo, mas modo vulgus.

{a} μακαρισμος, Beatitudinis praedicatio. Beza.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Where is then the blessedness - Margin, “What was” - in accordance with the Greek. The words “ye spake of” are not in the Greek, and should have been printed in italics. But they obscure the sense at any rate. This is not to be regarded as a question, asking what had become of the blessedness, implying that it had departed; but it is rather to be regarded as an exclamation, referring to the happiness of that moment, and their affection and joy when they thus received him. “What blessedness you had then! How happy was that moment! What tenderness of affection! What overflowing joy!” It was a time full of joy, and love, and affectionate confidence. So Tyndale well renders it, “How happy were ye then!” In this interpretation, Doddridge, Rosenmuller, Bloomfield, Koppe, Chandler, and others concur. Locke renders it, “What benedictions did you then pour out on me!”

For I bear you record - I testify.

Ye would have plucked out your own eyes ... - No higher proof of attachment could have been given. They loved him so much, that they would have given to him anything, however dear; they would have done anything to contribute to his welfare. How changed, now that they had abandoned his doctrines, and yielded themselves to the guidance of those who taught a wholly different doctrine!

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Some understand the blessedness here spoken of in a passive sense; you were then a blessed and happy people, receiving the doctrine of the gospel in the truth and purity of it; what is now become of that blessedness? But both the preceding and the following words seem to rule the sense otherwise, viz. Where is that blessedness which you predicted of me? You called me then blessed, and showed me such a dear affection that you would, if it would have done me good, have parted with what was dearest to you.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

15. Where… blessedness—The blessedness is the self-felicitation expressed by the Galatians in their first joy in the gospel. They have grown cold, and St. Paul now demands what has become of that first joy and love.

For—In illustration of the original glow of that blessedness. If…

possible—If I could have been adequately benefitted by so costly a gift.

Eyes—We see not the slightest reason to infer from this expression, with Alford, that St. Paul had himself weak eyes. The passage is the hyperbole of passionate affection.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Where is then (or, what was then) the blessedness ye spake of? (pou oun Receptus tiv ou+n h+n oJ makarismov uJmwn;); where, then, is that gratulation of yourselves (or, of yours)? The reading, pou ou+n, which is that of the best manuscripts, is now generally accepted in preference to that of the Textus Receptus, tiv ou+n h+n, in which, however, tiv ou+n stands on a higher footing of evidence than the remaining word h+n. This latter reading may be taken to mean: either, "Of what sort, then, was that gratulation of yours? "that is, what was its value in respect to the depth of conviction on which it was founded? tiv being qualis, as Luk_10:22 Luk_19:3, etc., which would bring us to much the same result as pou: or, "How great, then, was that gratulation of yours!" But the "then" (oun) comes in lamely; tote ("at that time") would have been more in place; and, further, it is questionable whether the tiv of admiration ever occurs without the wonder taking a tinge of inquiry, as, for example, Mar_6:2; Luk_5:21; zw Col_1:27, which would be out of place here. With the more approved reading, pou oun, the apostle asks, "What is, then, become of that gratulation of yourselves?" The "then" recites the fact, implied in the description given of their former behaviour, that they did once felicitate themselves on the apostle"s having brought them the gospel. This is more directly brought into view in the words which follow. As the verb makari) means "pronounce happy," as Luk_1:48 and Jam_5:11, the substantive makarismov denotes "pronouncing one to be happy;" as Rom_4:6, Rom_4:9. So Clement of Rome ("Ad Cor.," 50), who weaves the apostle"s words into his own sentence with the same meaning. This felicitation must have been pronounced by the Galatians upon themselves, not upon the apostle; the apostle would have spoken of himself on the object of their eujlogia, not of their makarismov. For I bear you record (marturw gar uJmin); for I bear you witness; testify on your behalf; the phrase always denoting commendation (Rom_10:2; Col_4:13) Compare "Ye were running well," in Gal_5:3. The verb denotes a deliberate, almost solemn, averment. That, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me (oti eij dunato touv ojfqalmouxantev ejdwkate Receptus, a ejdwkate moi,); that, if possible, ye had spirted out your eyes to give them to me. The phrase, ejxorussein ojfqalmouv, occurs in the Septuagint of Jud_1:16:21 and 1Sa_11:2, Hebrew, "bore out the eyes." The omission of the a which is rejected by recent editors, perhaps intimates the certainty and readiness with which they would have done it; but the particle occurs very sparingly in the New Testament as compared with classical Greek. There seems something strange in the specification of this particular form of evidencing zealous attachment. If there had otherwise appeared any question of making gifts, the apostle might have been construed to mean, "Ye were ready to give me anything, your very eyes even;" but this is not the case. Possibly the particular mention of "the Churches of Galatia" in 1Co_16:1 may have been occasioned by their having shown an especial readiness, even at the apostle"s second sojourn among them, to take part in the collection referred to; or by their having been the first Churches he came to in that particular tour, the directions which he gave to them being given also to all the Churches he went on to visit; but on this point see Introd. p. 16. The tone of Gal_6:6-10 does not betoken especial open-handedness on their part, unless, perhaps, the words, "let us not grow weary," hint at a liberality once displayed but now declined from. On the whole, this specification of "eyes" seems rather to point to there having been something amiss with the apostle"s own eyes, either from ophthalmia or as the effect of personal outrage perpetrated upon him. It is especially deserving of notice how the apostle, in the two clauses of this verse, links together their joy in their newly found Christian blessedness with their grateful love to himself; the latter fact is adduced as proof of the former. Their gospel happiness, he feels, was indissolubly woven in with their attachment to him: if they let go their joy in Christ Jesus, as, apart from any qualification to be acquired by observances of the Law of Moses, their all-sufficient righteousness, they must also of necessity become estranged from him, who was nothing if not the exponent and herald to them of that happiness. This consideration is of great moment for the right understanding of the next verse.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

What was then the blessedness ye spake of - On which ye so congratulated one another.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

VERSE 15. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of?

"How much happier you used to be. And how you Galatians used to tell me that you were blessed. And how much did I not praise and commend you formerly." Paul reminds them of former and better times in an effort to mitigate his sharp reproaches, lest the false apostles should slander him and misconstrue his letter to his disadvantage and to their own advantage. Such snakes in the grass are equal to anything. They will pervert words spoken from a sincere heart and twist them to mean just the opposite of what they were intended to convey. They are like spiders that suck venom out of sweet and fragrant flowers. The poison is not in the flowers, but it is the nature of the spider to turn what is good and wholesome into poison.

VERSE 15. For I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

The Apostle continues his praise of the Galatians. "You did not only treat me very courteously. If it had been necessary you would have plucked out your eyes and sacrificed your lives for me." And in very fact the Galatians sacrificed their lives for Paul. By receiving and maintaining Paul they called upon their own heads the hatred and malice of all the Jews and Gentiles.

Nowadays the name of Luther carries the same stigma. Whoever praises Luther is a worse sinner than an idolater, perjurer, or thief.

Martin Luther — Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (1535), English translation by Theodore Graebner (Zondervan, 1939) — public domain (U.S. copyright not renewed). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Where then is that gratulation of yourselves? for I bear you witness, that, if possible, ye would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me.

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

15. Where, then, is the blessedness? They then congratulated themselves that Paul had come to them with the gospel. I bear you record. So great was then their joy and sense of obligation, that they could not do enough to show their gratitude. Why, they would even have given him their own eyes!—a proverbial expression denoting very strong devotion.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

15. ποῦ אABCGP vulg. syrpesh. Harcl. marg. τίς Text. Rec. with DKL etc. SyrHarcl. text.

15. ποῦ. See notes on Textual Criticism. What has become of it now? Rom 3:27.

οὖν. Logically it should still continue.

ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν. Rom 4:6; Rom 4:9[125]. Cf. μακαρίζε, Luk 1:48; Jas 5:11. Not happiness, or “blessedness” (A.V.), which is μακαριότης, but “pronouncing blessing,” “gratulation,” R.V. The ὑμῶν is doubtless objective and reflexive, “of yourselves.” The meaning “gratulation of you” by other Christians is alien to the context, and for “your gratulation of me” (cf. Luk 1:48) as bearing so high and acceptable a message we should expect μακ. in the plural.

[125] Is affixed it means that all the passages are mentioned where the word occurs in the Greek Bible.

μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν. I freely bear witness to you of your love. There is no connotation of wishing to convict you of error now by my present testimony.

ὅτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν. While doubtless the eyes are carissima membra corporis (Pelag. in Zahn) it seems much more natural to find some special reason for the expression here. Apparently his eyes had been injured by the ἀσθένεια of Gal 4:13. There is no reason for connecting it with the effect of the vision, Act 9:17-18, nor with the σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί (2Co 12:7).

ἐξορύξαντες. Mar 2:4[126]. Of the eyes Jdg 16:21 (A); 1Sa 11:2.

[126] Is affixed to a word it means that all the passages are mentioned where that word occurs in the New Testament.

ἐδώκατέ μοι. “In hypothetical sentences, where unreality is expressed, the indicative is used both in the protasis and the apodosis; in the latter the insertion of ἄν is not obligatory, Joh 15:24” (Blass, Gram. § 63. 3; cf. Burton, Moods and Tenses, § 249). Perhaps its omission suggests greater certainty.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

15.] Where then (i.e. where in estimation, holding what place) (was) your congratulation (of yourselves)? i.e. considering your fickle behaviour since. ‘Quæ causa fuit gratulationis, si vos nunc pœnitet mei?’ Bengel. Various explanations have been given: ‘quæ (reading τίς) erat beatitudo vestra,’ neglecting the οὖν, and making μακαρισμός into beatitudo, which it will not bear: so (Œc., Luth., Beza, &c. All making the words into an exclamation (even if τίς be read) is inconsistent with the context, and with the logical precision of οὖν, and ὥστε below. ‘Where is then the blessedness ye spake of?’ (E. V.) is perhaps as good a rendering as the words will bear.

μαρτυρῶ γὰρ …] a proof to what lengths this μακαρισμός, and consequently their high value for St. Paul ran, at his first visit. In seeking for a reference for this expression, τ. ὀφθ. ὑμῶν ἐξορ. ἐδώκ. μοι, the right course will be, not at once to adopt the conclusion, that they point to ocular weakness on the part of the Apostle, nor because they form a trite proverb in many languages, therefore to set down (as Meyer, De W., Windischmann, al., have done) at once that no such allusion can have been intended, but to judge from the words themselves and our information from other sources whether such an allusion is likely. And in doing so, I may observe that a proverbial expression so harsh in its nature, and so little prepared by the context, would perhaps hardly have been introduced without some particle of climax. Would not the Apostle have more naturally written, ὅτι εἰ δυνατόν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθ. ὑμ.…? Had the καί been inserted, it would have deprived the words of all reference to a matter of fact, and made them purely proverbial. At the same time it is fair to say that the order τοὺς ὀφθ. ὑμῶν rather favours the purely proverbial reference. Had the Apostle’s eyes been affected, and had he wished to express “You would, if possible, have pulled out your own eyes, and have given them to me,” he would certainly have written ὑμῶν τοὺς ὀφθ., not τοὺς ὀφθ. ὑμῶν. In other words, the more emphatic τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς is, the more likely is the expression to be proverbial merely: the less emphatic τ. ὀφθ. is, the more likely to refer to some fact, in which the eyes were as matter of notoriety concerned. The inference then of any ocular disease from these words themselves seems to me precarious. Certainly Act 23:1 ff. receives light from such a supposition; but with our very small knowledge on the subject, many conjectures may be hazarded with some shew of support from Scripture, while none of them has enough foundation to make it probable on the whole. The proverb is abundantly illustrated by Wetst. ἐξορύσσω is the regular classic word: cf. Herod. viii. 116: this however is doubted by Ellic. See on the whole passage, Jowett’s most interesting “fragment on the character of St. Paul,” Epp. &c. vol. i. pp. 290-303.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

15. ποῦ οὖν ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν· “Where, then, is that gratulation of yourselves?” The question is rhetorical, implying that the gratulation has ceased, but without good reason. Cf. Luk 8:25: ποῦ ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν; and for instances with different implication, see Rom 3:27, 1Co 1:20, 1Co 1:12:17, 1Co 1:19. οὖν has the force of quae cum ita sint, referring to the facts stated in vv. 13, 14. ὑμῶν is probably objective genitive after μακαρισμός, “declaration of blessedness,” as is τοῦ ἀνθρώπου in Rom 4:6. Even if ὑμῶν be taken as subjective genitive (Sief.), it would be necessary to understand it as referring to a gratulation of themselves, not of others, as is shown clearly by the following sentence introduced by γάρ and referring to the enthusiasm of the Galatians in receiving Paul. On the use of the simple pronoun for the reflexive, see Rob. p. 681, and the examples in the immediately preceding and following sentences, πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν and ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν.

Ποῦ is the reading of אABCFGP 33, 104, 424**, 442, 1912 f g Vg. Syr. (psh. harcl. mg.), Boh. Arm. Euthal. Dam. Hier. Pelag. Of these f Vg. Boh. (?) Arm. Hier. al. add ἐστίν after οὖν. DKL al. pler. d Goth. Syr. (harcl. txt.) Thdr. Mop. Sever. Chr. Thdrt. Thphyl. Oec. Victorin. Aug. Ambrst. al. read τίς instead of ποῦ. DFGK al. pler. d e Goth. Chr. Thdrt. Aug. Ambrst. add ἦν after οὖν. The choice is between ποῦ οὖν and τίς οὖν ἦν, the other readings being corruptions or conflations of these. Internal evidence is indecisive. Mey. and, following him, Zahn prefer τίς οὖν ἦν. But the strong preponderance of external evidence requires the adoption of ποῦ οὖν. The alternative reading is probably an unintentional clerical corruption, ΠΟ being converted into ΤΙΣ, and Υ omitted to make sense.

μαρτυρῶ γὰρ ὑμῖν ὂτι εἰ δυνατὸν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες ἐδώκατέ μοι. “For I bear you witness that ye would, if possible, have plucked out your eyes and given them to me.” A confirmation immediately of the assertion implied in ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν but indirectly of the affirmation of their former favourable attitude, which began with οὐδὲν ἠδικήσατέ με, v. 13. That he dwells on this matter at such length and states it so strongly shows the apostle’s strong desire to reinstate himself in the affections of the Galatians. The language escapes hyperbole only by the expression εἰ δυνατόν. The inference from the reference to the eyes that Paul’s weakness of the flesh was a disease of the eyes, though slightly favoured by εἰ δυνατόν in preference, e. g., to εἰ ἀναγκαῖον is very precarious.

Υμῖν is not an indirect object denoting the person who receives the testimony (cf. Act 15:8), but dative of advantage, denoting the one to whose credit witness is borne (cf. Act 22:5, Rom 10:2, Col 4:13). εἰ δυνατὸν … ἐδώκατέ μοι is evidently a hypothesis contrary to fact, ἄν being omitted. Cf. BMT 249 and Mat 26:24, Joh 9:32, Joh 15:22, Joh 19:11. On the mention of the eyes as the most precious members of the body, cf. Deu 32:10, Psa 17:8, Zach. 2:8, and on ἐξορύσσω of the plucking out of the eyes, see Hdt. 8:116: ἐξώρυξε αὐτῶν ὁ πατὴρ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς διὰ τὴν αἰτίην ταύτην (viz., for going to war against his command), and other exx. cited by Wetst., ad loc., also Lxx, Jdg 16:21 (A; B reads ἐκκόπτω); 1Sa 11:2. Jos. Ant. 6. 69 (5:1) uses ἐκκόπτω; Mat 5:30, Mat 18:9, ἐξαιρέω. Of mention of the plucking out of one’s eyes as an act of self-sacrifice no example other than the present has been pointed out.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? [που ουν ο μακαρισμος υμων] . Makarismov, P o. Comp. Rom 4:6, 9. Not blessedness, but pronouncing blessed, felicitation. "What had become of your self gratulation on my presence and teaching?" Ye spake of is an attempt to render uJmwn. Better, "Where is then that gratulation of yours?" I bear you record [μαρτυρω] . Better, witness. Bear record is common in A. V. for bear witness. Record is used both of a person, as God is my record, Phi 1:8; I call God for a record, 1Co 1:23, and in the sense of evidence or testimony. So Shaks. Richard 2 1 1 30 : "First, Heaven be the record to my speech."

Plucked out [εξορυξαντες] . Lit. dug out. Only here, and Mr 2:4, of digging up the roof in order to let down the paralytic before Jesus. Your own eyes [τους οφθαλμους υμων] . Better, your eyes. Eyes, as most treasured possessions. Comp. Psa 17:8; Pro 7:2; Zec 2:8. Some have found here evidence that Paul was afflicted with disease of the eyes. See Dr. John Brown's Horae Subsecivae. Accordingly they explain these words, "You would have given me your own eyes to replace mine." But uJmwn is unemphatic, your. All attempts to connect the passage with Paul 's "thorn in the flesh" (2Co 7:7) are to be dismissed as fanciful.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.