Galatians 1:13

For ye have heard of my manner of life in times past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and made havoc of it: and I advanced in the Jews' religion beyond many of mine own age among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.

In these two verses, "Paul was saying that no human persuasion could ever have been able to impart the gospel to such a confirmed and ferocious persecutor.[38] Only the power of God could have done such a thing. And what was that power? It was noted above that the Spirit of God through the enabling of power to work miracles had confirmed the fact of Paul's having the revelation from Christ (Galatians 1:12); but it should be carefully noted that the Holy Spirit did not convey the revelation, for that was done personally by Christ. The function of the Holy Spirit, even in the Twelve, was not that of conveying God's truth to them, but that of helping them remember the truth Christ conveyed; and the same fact is in evidence with reference to the revelation Paul had received from Christ, not from the Holy Spirit. See extensive comment on this exceedingly important truth in my Commentary on John 16:13. The Lord revealed that the Holy Spirit "shall not speak of himself' (John 16:13), meaning that power to convey gospel truth did not reside in the Third Person of the Godhead. There were limitations upon the Second Person during his incarnation (Matthew 24:36); and, similarly, there were limitations upon the Spirit's power in human beings.

The proposition that the Holy Spirit operated upon Paul directly, independently of the word which Christ delivered to humanity, is a contradiction of everything in the New Testament. If the Spirit could have done such a thing, it would not have been necessary at all for Christ to come into this world in the first place, nor would it have been necessary for him to appear personally to Saul of Tarsus. Paul received a full knowledge of the gospel in exactly the same manner as the Twelve received it, from Christ himself, as Paul affirmed in Galatians 1:12; and the function of the Holy Spirit in Paul was to enable Paul to remember all that Jesus said, exactly as in the case of the Twelve (John 14:26). Since the personal appearance of Christ to Saul of Tarsus, and later to John the apostle, in all ages since, the Holy Spirit has never conveyed a single new truth to any person whomsoever; and, as always, the Spirit's function even in those instances was to enable truth to be remembered and not to convey it. So-called "spirituals" in our own times have nothing except the sacred Scripture; because, if they did have truth to convey to others, the Spirit of God would confirm it with the power to do "signs and wonders and mighty deeds," as he did in the case of Paul and the Twelve. They were guided into "all truth" (John 16:13).

I persecuted the church... This went even further than many Pharisees were willing to go. "The ravening wolf of Benjamin"[39] was "laying waste the church." Paul here declared "ye have heard" of this, indicating the notorious nature of his conduct, and also, perhaps, that "He brought his own career and experience into his preaching (as in this epistle), so that they may have heard it from his own lips."[40] Paul's persecution of the church was totally the equivalent of persecuting Christ personally (Acts 22:8). Cole elaborated on this thus:

Opposition to the church is not only opposition to Jesus the Messiah... It is opposition to God, who in the Old Testament had chosen Israel as his "company," and who now has chosen the Christian church, whether Jew or Gentile.[41]

The Jews' religion... "The Judaism," as it is in the Greek, includes both the divine original as conveyed through Moses and the prophets and also that incredibly large body of traditions and elaborations of it which had been added by the religious hierarchy of Israel, the latter coming in time to surpass (in their eyes) the importance of the God-given law itself, making it "of no effect" (Mark 7:13; Matthew 15:6). Paul's here speaking of Judaism as something apart from Christianity shows that within two decades after the resurrection of Christ the term had become synonymous with opposition to Christianity. However, since Jews were the first Christians and have always been welcome to accept Christ, the term "Jews," as used here and extensively in John, has religious rather than racial overtones. The blunder of the Medieval church in blurring this distinction is one of the great tragedies of all time. Some scholars, including Lipscomb, believed that Paul here referred exclusively to the Pharisaical additions to God's law; but it is an obvious truth that he exceeded his countrymen in knowledge of the divine law itself, as evidenced by his writings.

Church of God... Paul also referred to the community of believers as the church of Christ; and apparently the reason for making it "church of God" in this place was to emphasize that the church was not merely of Christ but also, in view of Christ's oneness and equality with God (a fact the Judaizers at work among the Galatians would deny), the Christians were "the congregation of God,"[42] no less than being the church of Christ.

Exceedingly zealous ...; Acts 9:1 and Acts 22:4 reveal the murderous and fanatical persecution Paul mounted against Christianity, resulting in the death of "both men and women." Paul's hatred of the church sprang from the vivid accuracy with which he saw the true nature of Judaism, the typical forms and ceremonies of which are simply irreconcilable with Christianity. The very heart of the sacred Law itself was typical and preparatory by nature; and Paul's favorite words regarding it were: "abrogated, done away, taken away, annulled, etc." It was this aspect of Christianity, truly understood, which so antagonized and enraged Saul of Tarsus. As soon as he accepted Christ, he accepted the very first corollary of the faith, that as far as worshipping Almighty God is concerned, it is all over and done with for Judaism.

[38] William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 52.

[39] Everett F. Harrison, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 695.

[40] William Sanday, op. cit., p. 430.

[41] R. A. Cole, op. cit., p. 49.

[42] The Emphatic Diaglott (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), in loco.