The interpretation timeline
Galatians 1:24 Douay-Rheims

And they glorified God in me.

A.D. 407 – 1871 5 witnesses

Patristic

before A.D. 750
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“"And they glorified God in me." See here again how accurately he observes the rule of his humility; he says not, they admired me, they applauded or were astonished at me, but ascribes all to Divine grace by the words, "they glorified God in me."”

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1273
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“After the Apostle has above shown that he did not receive the Gospel from man before his conversion, nor at the time of his conversion, here he proves that he did not receive it from man even after his conversion; rather, here he shows how his teaching was approved by men. And concerning this he does two things. First, he shows how his teaching was approved by the apostles; second, he shows how it was approved by the other faithful, at the place then I came into the regions, etc. And first he narrates the fact; second he confirms the truth of what he has said, at the place behold, before God, etc. He says therefore: although I did not go to the apostles in order to be instructed by them concerning the beginning of my conversion, since I was already instructed by Christ, nevertheless, driven by an affection of charity, after three years — namely, of my conversion — I came to Jerusalem, since I had for a long time desired to see Peter, not in order to learn from him, but in order to visit him. Job 5:24: "visiting your beauty," etc. And I remained with him fifteen days, being found by him to be a truthful apostle. And he says fifteen days, because this number is composed of eight and seven. Now the number eight is the number of the New Testament, in which the eighth day of those who rise again is awaited; while the number seven is the number of the Old Testament, because it celebrates the seventh day. He remained with Peter fifteen days, conferring with him about the mysteries of the Old and New Testament. And lest it be believed that, although he was not instructed by Peter, he was nevertheless instructed by others, he adds that he was not instructed by others either. Hence he says but of the other apostles I saw none, that is, no one, by whom I might have been instructed, except James the brother of the Lord. For he saw him in Jerusalem. Concerning this James it should be known that he was bishop of Jerusalem, and was called James the Less, because he had been called after the other James. Many things are said about him at Acts 15:13ff. He also wrote a canonical epistle. But why he is called the brother of the Lord is said differently by different people. For Helvidius says that he is called brother of the Lord for this reason, that he was the son of the Blessed Virgin. For he says that the Blessed Virgin conceived and bore Christ, and after the birth of Christ conceived by Joseph, and bore other sons. But this error has been condemned and rejected. Likewise it is plainly false, because James was not the son of Joseph, but of Alphaeus. Others, however, say that Joseph, before the Blessed Virgin, had another wife, from whom he had a son James and others, and when she died, he took the Blessed Virgin as wife, from whom Christ was born, yet not known by Joseph, but by the Holy Spirit, as is said in the Gospel. Because, then, kinships are named from the father, and Joseph was thought to be the father of Christ, therefore this James, although he was not the son of the Virgin, was nevertheless called brother of the Lord. But this is false, because if the Lord did not wish his mother, a virgin, to be entrusted to the keeping of anyone but a virgin, how would he have permitted her spouse not to have been a virgin, and to have remained so? Therefore others say, and it is touched on in the Gloss, that this James was the son of Mary of Cleophas, who was the sister of the Virgin. For they say that Anna, the mother of the Blessed Virgin, married first Joachim, from whom she bore Mary, the mother of the Lord; when he died, she married Cleophas, the brother of Joachim, from whom she bore Mary of Cleophas, and from her was born James the Less, Jude, and Simon; when he died, it is said that she then married a certain third man, who was called Salome, from whom she conceived and bore another Mary, who was called Salome, and from her was born James the Greater, and John, his brother. But Jerome contradicts this opinion in two ways. First, because Salome is not the name of a man, as also appears in the Greek, but is the name of a woman, who was the sister of the Blessed Virgin, and by Zebedee bore James the Greater and John, just as Mary of Cleophas by Alphaeus bore James the Less, Jude, and Simon. Now this James is called brother of the Lord specially among his other cousins, and this for two reasons: first, on account of a likeness of appearance, because he was like Christ in face; and on account of a likeness of life, because he imitated Christ in his ways. Or because Alphaeus his father was of the kinship of Joseph; and therefore, since the Jews were accustomed to trace the line of kinship from the males, and Christ was thought to be the son of Joseph, as is said in Luke 3:23, therefore he in particular was called brother of the Lord, and not the others, who were joined to him only through the mother. Here, however, "brother" is taken in the sense of kinship. For in Scripture "brothers" are sometimes said by nature. Matthew 1:2: "and Jacob begot Judah and his brothers." By kinship, as all blood relations are brothers. Genesis 13:8: "let there be no quarrel, I beg, between me and you, for we are brothers." By people, and thus all of one language are called brothers. Deuteronomy 17:15: "you may not set a man of another people as king, who is not your brother." By affection, and thus all friends, and those who have the same affection, are called brothers. 2 Corinthians 2:13: "because I did not find Titus my brother," etc. By religion, and thus all Christians who have one rule of life are called brothers. Matthew 23:8: "you are brothers," etc. Psalm 132:1: "behold how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together," etc. And commonly all men are called brothers, because they are governed and brought up by the one God. Malachi 2:10: "have we not all one father," etc. Next, when he says but the things that I write to you, etc., he confirms by an oath what he had said, as if to say: these things which I now write to you about myself, behold, they are in the open, so that it is sufficiently established that I do not lie. And this I say, before God, that is, with God as witness. Now the Apostle swears here not out of levity, but out of the necessity of those for whom it was necessary that they believe. For unless he did this, they would not believe him. 2 Corinthians 2:17: "before God, in Christ, we speak." Romans 1:9: "God is my witness," etc. What, then, does the Lord say: "let your speech be, yes, yes; no, no; what is more than this is from evil"? It must be said that it is from the evil of him who does not believe, or from the evil of the punishment by which someone is compelled to swear. Next, when he says then I came, etc., he shows how he was approved by the other churches of Judea. Here he does three things. First he shows where he stayed, namely, in Cilicia. Hence he says then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, namely, of his homeland; whence also he had been carried off — for it is said at Acts 22:3: "now Paul was from Tarsus of Cilicia," etc. Second, how he was known by them, namely, not by face, but only by hearing and report. Hence he says for I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea that were in Christ, that is, in the faith of Christ. 2 Corinthians 6:8: "as unknown, and known." Whence it is clear that the churches of Judea did not teach me. For they had only heard, namely, of me by report, that he who persecuted, etc. Third, how he was approved by them, because they glorified God in me, that is, in my conversion they approved as great him who by his grace converted me. Isaiah 43:20: "the beast shall glorify me," etc.”

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“And they glorified God in me. Or "for me"; on his account; for the wonderful grace bestowed on him and wrought in him; for the surprising change that was made in him, that of a persecutor he should become a preacher, which they ascribed, as he himself did, to the abundant grace of God; they were greatly thankful and blessed God, who had given him such large gifts, and made him so greatly useful in the cause, and among the churches of Christ. And by observing this, how much the churches in Judea were affected with the grace of God vouchsafed to him, though they had never seen him nor heard him, he tacitly strikes at and rebukes the false teachers, and the Galatians that adhered to them, for their different treatment of him; to whom he was not only known by face, but had preach among them so fully, clearly, and powerfully, the Gospel of the grace of God. Next: Galatians Chapter 2”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“They glorified God in me - Hearing now that I preached that faith which before I had persecuted and endeavored to destroy, they glorified God for the grace which had wrought my conversion. I owe nothing to them; I owe all to God; and they themselves acknowledge this. I received all from God, and God has all the glory. 1. It appeared of great importance to St. Paul to defend and vindicate his Divine mission. As he had none from man, it was the more necessary that he should be able to show plainly that he had one from God. Paul was not brought into the Christian ministry by any rite ever used in the Christian Church. Neither bishop nor presbyter ever laid hands on him; and he is more anxious to prove this, because his chief honor arose from being sent immediately by God himself: his conversion and the purity of his doctrine showed whence he came. Many since his time, and in the present day, are far more anxious to show that they are legitimately appointed by Man than by God; and are fond of displaying their human credentials. These are easily shown; those that come from God are out of their reach. How idle and vain is a boasted succession from the apostles, while ignorance, intolerance, pride, and vain-glory prove that those very persons have no commission from heaven! Endless cases may occur where man sends and yet God will not sanction. And that man has no right to preach, nor administer the sacraments of the Church of Christ, whom God has not sent; though the whole assembly of apostles had laid their hands on him. God never sent, and never will send, to convert others, a man who is not converted himself. He will never send him to teach meekness, gentleness, and long suffering, who is proud, overbearing, intolerant, and impatient. He, in whom the Spirit of Christ does not dwell, never had a commission to preach the Gospel; he may boast of his human authority, but God will laugh him to scorn. On the other hand, let none run before he is sent; and when he has got the authority of God, let him be careful to take that of the Church with him also. 2. The apostle was particularly anxious that the Gospel should not be corrupted, that the Church might not be perverted. Whatever corrupts the Gospel, subverts the Church. The Church is a spiritual building, and stands on a spiritual foundation. Its members are compared to stones in a building, but they are living stones - each instinct with the spirit of a Divine life; Jesus is not only the foundation and the head-stone, but the spirit that quickens and animates all. A Church, where the members are not alive to God, and where the minister is not filled with the meekness and gentleness of Jesus, differs as much from a genuine Church as a corpse does from an active human being. False teachers in Galatia corrupted the Church, by introducing those Jewish ceremonies which God had abolished; and the doctrine of justification by the use of those ceremonies which God had shown by the death of his Son to be of none effect. "If those," says Quesnel, "are justly said to pervert the Gospel of Christ, who were for joining with it human ceremonies which God himself instituted, what do those do, who would fondly reconcile and blend it with the pomps of the devil? The purity of the Gospel cannot admit of any mixture. Those who do not love it, are so far from building up that they trouble and overturn all. There is no ground of trust and confidence for such workmen." 3. If he be a dangerous man in the Church who introduces Jewish or human ceremonies which God has not appointed, how much more is he to be dreaded who introduces any false doctrine, or who labors to undermine or lessen the influence of that which is true? And even he who does not faithfully and earnestly preach and inculcate the true doctrine is not a true pastor. It is not sufficient that a man preach no error; he must preach the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 4. How is it that we have so many Churches like those in Galatia? Is it not because, on one hand, we disturb the simplicity of the Christian worship by Jewish, heathenish, or improper rites and ceremonies; and on the other, corrupt the purity of its doctrines by the inventions of men? How does the apostle speak of such corrupters? Let them be accursed. How awful is this! Let every man who officiates as a Christian minister look well to this. His own soul is at stake; and, if any of the flock perish through his ignorance or neglect, their blood will God require at the watchman's hand. 5. St. Paul well knew that, if he endeavored to please man, he could not be the servant of Christ. Can any minor minister hope to succeed, where even an apostle, had he followed that line, could not? The interests of Christ and those of the world are so opposite, that it is impossible to reconcile them; and he who attempts it shows thereby that he knows neither Christ nor the world, though so deeply immersed in the spirit of the latter. 6. God generally confounds the expectations of men-pleasing ministers; they never ultimately succeed even with men. God abhors them, and those whom they have flattered find them to be dishonest, and cease to trust them. He who is unfaithful to his God should not be trusted by man.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“in me--"in my case." "Having understood the entire change, and that the former wolf is now acting the shepherd's part, they received occasion for joyful thanksgiving to God in respect to me" [THEODORET]. How different, he implies to the Galatians, their spirit from yours! Next: Galatians Chapter 2”
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.