12

The former, resuming the subject which has been interrupted by his defence of himself, is more after the Apostle's manner, while the latter would seem the obvious connecting particle to transcribers. On the other hand de may possibly have been substituted for yàp here, because it is found with γνωρίζω (-ζομεν) in 1 Cor. IV. I, 2 Cor. viii. I.

ἔστιν] is here only the copula. The present tense is used instead of the imperfect to show the permanence and unchangeableness of his Gospel. See ii. 2. κατὰ ἄνθρωπον] ‘after any human fashion or standard.' See on iii. 15.

12. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγώ] For to go a step farther back, neither did I myself receive it from man.' The force of the particle ovdè is best sought for in the context. Οὐδὲ ἐγὼ παρέλαβον answers to τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν ὑπ ̓ ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν, as παρὰ ἀνθρώπου answers to κατὰ ἄνθρωπον. Others explain it 'I as little as the Twelve,' 'I in whom perhaps it might have been expected': but such interpretations are not reflected in the context.

παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον] The idea in the preposition is sufficiently wide to include both the ἀπὸ and διὰ of ver. 1. I do not think the distinction given by Winer § xlvii. p. 463, and others, between λαμβάνειν παρὰ Κυρίου and λαμβάνειν ἀπὸ Κυρίου (1 Cor. xi. 23), as denoting respectively direct and indirect communication, can be insisted upon. It is true, that while ἀπὸ contemplates only the giver, παρὰ in a manner connects the giver with the receiver, denoting the passage from the one to the other, but the links of the chain between the two

may be numerous, and in all cases where the idea of transmission is prominent rapà will be used in preference to ἀπό, be the communication direct or indirect; so Phil. iv. 18 deξάμενος παρὰ Ἐπαφροδίτου τὰ παρ' ὑμῶν: comp. Plat. Symp. 202 Ε. The verb παραλαμβάνειν may be used either of the ultimate receiver or of any intermediate agent, provided that the idea of transmission be retained; i.e. it may be either (1) to receive as transmitted to oneself, 2 Thess. iii. 6, or (2) to receive so as to transmit to others. In this latter sense it is used of the Apostles, who receiving the Gospel directly from the Lord passed it to others. See I Cor. xi. 23, XV. I, 3, and compare παραγγελία.

οὔτε ἐδιδάχθην] The authorities being nearly equally divided between οὔτε and οὐδέ, I have with some hesitation retained the former in the text, as being the less regular collocation (ovδέ...ούτε), and therefore more likely to be altered. In this case another οὔτε is to be understood before παρέλαβον, the δὲ of οὐδὲ having reference to the former sentence. See Winer § lv. 6, p. 617, and esp. A. Buttmann p. 315.

ἐδιδάχθην is added to explain and enforce παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον, and thus to bring out the contrast with δι' ἀποκαλύψεως: ‘I received it not by instruction from man but by revelation from Christ.' For a somewhat similar contrast see Cic. pro Mil. c. 4, 'Est enim haec, judices, non scripta sed nata lex; quam non didicimus, accepimus, legimus, verum ex natura ipsa arripuimus, hausimus, expressimus.'

13, 14. My early education is a

proof that I did not receive the Gospel from man. I was brought up in a rigid school of ritualism, directly opposed to the liberty of the Gospel. I was from age and temper a staunch adherent of the principles of that school. Acting upon them, I relentlessly persecuted the Christian brotherhood. No human agency therefore could have brought about the change. It required a direct interposition from God.'

13. ἠκούσατε] 'ye heard, I told you, when I was with you.' The history of his past career as a persecutor formed part of his preaching: see Acts xxii. 2-21, xxvi. 4—23, 1 Cor. xv. 8-10: comp. Phil. iii. 6, 1 Tim. i. 13. The A.V., ‘ye have heard,' gives a wrong meaning.

ἀναστροφήν ποτε] for the more usual ποτε ἀναστροφήν, as ver. 23 ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτέ. Similar displacements of words, which would ordinarily come between the article and substantive, are frequent in the New Testament. See on i Thess. i. I; and Winer § xx. p. 169 sq.

Ἰουδαϊσμῷ] observance of Jewish rites.' The word does not in itself imply any disparagement. Comp. 2 Macc. ii. 21 τοῖς ὑπὲρ τοῦ Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ φιλοτίμως ἀνδραγαθήσασιν, xiv. 38 σῶμα καὶ ψυχὴν ὑπὲρ τοῦ Ἰουδαϊσμοῦ παραβεβλημένος, and Ἰουδαΐζειν Gal. ii. 14. Though perhaps originally coined by the heathen and, as used by them, conveying some shadow of contempt, it would, when neutralised among the Jews themselves, lose this idea and even become a title of honour. The case of Χριστιανός, likewise a term of reproach in the first instance, is a parallel.

ἐπόρθουν κ.τ.λ.] I devastated the Church, as Acts ix. 21 οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ πορθήσας ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ τοὺς ἐπικαλουμένους κ.τ.λ. Compare έλυμαίνετο τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, Acts viii. 3.

14. συνηλικιώτας] 'of my own age, who embraced the religion of their fathers with all the ardour of youthful patriotism. The Attics use the simple form ἡλικιώτης, while the compound belongs to the later dialect. Compare the similar instances of πολίτης (συμπολίτης, Ephes. ii. 19), φυλέτης (συμφυλέτης, ο Thess. ii. 14), etc. In this class of words the later language aims at greater definiteness. The rule however is not absolute, but only expresses a general tendency. See Lobeck Phryn. pp. 172, 471.

ἐν τῷ γένει μου] ' in my race, i.e. among the Jews, an incidental proof that St Paul is addressing Gentile converts. See p. 26, note 3. In the same way, Rom. xvi. 7, 21, he mentions certain Jews as his 'kinsmen' (συγγενεῖς). Comp. also Rom. ix. 3 ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀδελφῶν μου τῶν συγγενῶν μου κατὰ σάρκα.

περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων] The adverb περισσοτέρως, which is frequent in St Paul, seems always to retain its comparative force. Here it is explained by ὑπὲρ πολλούς. For ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων comp. Acts xxi. 20 πάντες ζηλωταὶ τοῦ νόμου ὑπάρχουσιν. St Paul seems to have belonged to the extreme party of the Pharisees (Acts xxii. 3, xxiii. 7, xxvi. 5, Phil. iii. 5, 6), whose pride it was to call themselves 'zealots of the law, zealots of God.' To this party also had belonged Simon, one of the Twelve, thence surnamed the zealot, ζηλωτὴς Οι καναναῖος, Ι.Θ. (Nyp. A portion of

these extreme partizans, forming into a separate sect under Judas of Galilee, took the name of 'zealots' par excellence, and distinguished themselves by their furious opposition to the Romans: Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 1. 1, 6. See Ewald Gesch. des Volkes Isr. v. p. 25 sq, p. 322, VI. p. 340.

τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων] of the traditions handed down from my fathers. It is doubtful whether the law of Moses is included in this expression. In Josephus тà éк mapadóσews TV Tатépwv (Antiq. xiii. 10. 6), ἡ πατρῴα παράδοσις (ib. 16. 2), are the Pharisaic traditions, as distinguished from the written law. See also Matth. xv. 2, 3, 6, Mark vii. 3, 5, 8, 9, 13. These passages seem to show that the word παράδοσις, which might in itself include equally well the written law, signified in the mouth of a Jew the traditional interpretations and additions (afterwards embodied in the Mishna), as distinguished from the text on which they were founded and which they professed to supplement.

15-17. Then came my conversion. It was the work of God's grace. It was foreordained, before I had any separate existence. It was not therefore due to any merits of my own, it did not spring from any principles of my own. The revelation of His Son in me, the call to preach to the Gentiles, were acts of His good pleasure. Thus converted, I took no counsel of human advisers. I did not betake myself to the elder Apostles, as I might naturally have done. I secluded myself in Arabia, and, when I emerged from my retirement, instead of going to Jerusalem, I returned to Damascus.'

15. ó ȧpopíσas] 'who set me apart, devoted me to a special pur

pose': Rom. i. 1 dpwpiσμévos els evayyeλov Ocoû. See also Acts xiii. 2 ἀφορίσατε δή μοι κ.τ.λ. The words ὁ Oeos of the received text are to be struck out as a gloss, though a correct one. Similar omissions are frequent in St Paul; see i. 6, ii. 8, iii. 5, v. 8, Rom. viii. 11, Phil. i. 6, 1 Thess. v. 24.

Observe how words are accumulated to tell upon the one point on which he is insisting—the sole agency of God as distinct from his own efforts: εὐδόκησεν, ἀφορίσας, ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου, καλέσας, χάριτος αὐτοῦ.

ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου] ‘from before my birth, before I had any impulses, any principles of my own.' For the expression see Judges xvi. 17 ayıs Θεοῦ ἐγώ εἰμι ἀπὸ κοιλίας μητρός μου, Is. xliv. 2, 24, xlix. 1, 5 ó #λáσas μe ἐκ κοιλίας δοῦλον ἑαυτῷ, Psalm lxx. 6 ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου σύ μου εἶ σrns, and frequently in the LXX. The preposition seems to be merely temporal. The A. V., 'who separated me from my mother's womb,' obscures, if it does not misinterpret, the

sense.

σκεπα

καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ] See the note on i. 6.

16. Three separate stages in the history of the Apostle's consecration to his ministry seem to be mentioned here. First, the predestination to his high office, which dated from before his birth (ὁ ἀφορίσας με κ.τ.λ.); Secondly, the conversion and call to the Apostleship, which took place on the way to Damascus, Acts ix. 3 sq (καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ); and Thirdly, the entering upon his ministry in fulfilment of this call, Acts ix. 20 8q, xiii. 2, 3 (ἀποκαλύψαι ἐν ἐμοὶ ἵνα εὐαγγελίζωμαι).

The distinction of these three stages seems well marked; and if so, this de

termines the meaning of ἐν ἐμοί. It does not speak of a revelation made inwardly to himself, but of a revelation made through him to others. The preposition év is used in preference to diá, because St Paul was not only the instrument in preaching the Gospel, but also in his own person bore the strongest testimony to its power. He constantly places his conversion in this light; see ver. 24 ἐδόξαζον ἐν ἐμοὶ τὸν Θεόν, ο Tim. i. 16 διὰ τοῦτο ἐλεήθην ἵνα ἐν ἐμοὶ πρώτῳ ἐνδείξηται Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς τὴν ἅπασαν μακροθυμίαν πρὸς ὑποτύπωσιν τῶν μελ λόντων πιστεύειν κ.τ.λ., 2 Cor. xiii. 3 τοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ λαλοῦντος Χριστοῦ, Phil.

i. 30. The rendering of ἐν ἐμοὶ 'within me,' i.e. 'in my heart,' seems neither to suit the context so well, nor to be so natural in itself.

εὐθέως οὐ προσανεθέμην κ.τ.λ.] forth with, instead of conferring with flesh and blood, etc., I departed to Arabia. Οι ανατίθεσθαι see the note ii. 2. In the double compound προσανατίθεσθαι the idea of communication or consultation is stronger. The use of the word in heathen writers indirectly illustrates its sense here. It is employed especially of consulting soothsayers, and the like, as in Chrysippus (in Suidas, s.V. νεοττός) προσαναθέσθαι ὀνειροκρίτῃ, Diod. Sic. xvii. 116 τοῖς μάντεσι προσαναθέμενος περὶ τοῦ σημείου. Comp. Lucian Jup. Trag. § 1 (Π. Ρ. 642) ἐμοὶ προσανάθου, λάβε με σύμβουλον πόνων. See the note ii. 6.

For σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι compare our Lord's words to St Peter, Matt. xvi. 17 'Flesh and blood did not reveal it unto thee.'

17. ἀνῆλθον] ‘I came up! This

verb and ἀναβαίνειν are used especially of visiting Jerusalem, situated in the high lands of Palestine, as κατέρχεσθαι, καταβαίνειν, are of leaving it. See Luke x. 30, Acts xi. 27, xii. 19, XV. I, 2, xxi. 15, XXV. 1, 6, 7, and especially Acts xviii. 22, xxiv. I. In the two last passages αναβαίνειν and καταβαίνειν are used absolutely without any mention of Jerusalem, this being implied in the expressions 'going up,' 'going down.' Here the various reading ἀπῆλθον las great claims to a place in the text. Both words occur in the context and it is difficult to say in favour of which reading the possible confusion of transcribers may more justly be urged. Perhaps however it is improbable that St Paul should have written ἀπῆλθον twice consecutively, as the repetition makes the sentence run awkwardly; though in Rom. viii. 15, 1 Cor. ii. 13, Heb. xii. 18, 22, something of the kind occurs.

τοὺς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἀποστόλους] those who were Apostles before me,' possibly including others besides the Twelve, especially James. See below, p. 95, note 4. For the expression compare Rom. xvi. 7, οἵτινές εἰσιν ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις οἳ καὶ πρὸ ἐμοῦ γέγοναν ἐν Χριστῷ, where however the construction is doubtful.

εἰς Δαμασκόν] A danger which threatened St Paul's life on this occasion seems to have left a deep impression on his mind, and is mentioned by him in another epistle, nearly contemporaneous with this, 2 Cor. xi. 32.

18-24. 'Not till three years were past did I go up to Jerusalem. My object in doing so was to confer with Cephas. But I did not remain with

19

him more than a fortnight; and of all the other Apostles I saw only James the Lord's brother. As in the sight of God, I declare to you that every word I write is true. Then I went to the distant regions of Syria and Cilicia. Thus I was personally unknown to the Christian brotherhood in Judæa. They had only heard that their former persecutor was now preaching the very faith which before he had attempted to destroy: and they glorified God for my conversion.'

18. ἔπειτα μετὰ ἔτη τρία] From what point of time are these three years reckoned? Probably from the great epoch of his life, from his conversion. The 'straightway' of ver. 16 leads to this conclusion; 'At first I conferred not with flesh and blood, it was only after the lapse of three years that I went to Jerusalem.'

Ἱεροσόλυμα] is generally a neuter plural. In Matt. ii. 3 however we have râσa 'Ieporóλvμa. See A. Buttmann Gramm. p. 16. On the forms Ἱεροσόλυμα and Ἱερουσαλὴμ see the note iv. 26.

ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν] ' to visit Cephas. ἱστορῆσαι is somewhat emphatic: ‘Α word used,' says Chrysostom, 'by those who go to see great and famous cities.' It is generally said of things and places; less commonly, as here, of persons: comp. Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 1. 8 ȧvýp ὧν ἐγὼ κατ ̓ ἐκεῖνον ἱστόρησα τὸν πόλεμov, and Clem. Hom. viii. 1, etc. St Peter is mentioned by St Paul only in this epistle and 1 Corinthians. Kŋpay is the right reading here, though there is respectable authority for ПéTрov. If the existing authorities are to be trusted, St Paul seems to have used the Aramaic and Greek names

indifferently. Allowance ought to be made however for the tendency to substitute the more usual Пéтpos for the less common Kŋpâs, e.g. here and ii. 9, II, 14. In the Peshito Version Cephas, as the Aramaic name, is not unnaturally adopted throughout this epistle.

δεκαπέντε] Α later form for the more classical πεντεκαίδεκα. This and the analogous forms of numerals occur frequently in the Mss of Greek authors of the post-classical age, but in many cases are doubtless due to the transcribers writing out the words at length, where they had only the numeral letters before them. The frequent occurrence of these forms however in the Tabulae Heracleenses is a decisive testimony to their use, at least in some dialects, much before the Christian era. They are found often in the

LXX.

St Paul's visit on this occasion was abruptly terminated. He left on account of a plot against his life (Acts ix. 29) and in pursuance of a vision (Acts xxii. 17-21).

19. εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον] Is James here styled an Apostle or not? Are we to translate, 'I saw no other Apostle save James,' or 'I saw no other Apostle but only James'? It will be seen that the question is not whether ei un retains its exceptive force or not, for this it seems always to do (see note on i. 7), but whether the exception refers to the whole clause or to the verb alone. That the latter is quite a possible construction will appear from Matth. xii. 4, Luke iv. 26, 27, Gal. ii. 16, Rev. xxi. 27; see Fritzsche on Rom. III. p. 195. But on the other hand the sense of repov naturally links it with