Galatians 1: The Greeting, the One Gospel, and the Call
Galatians 1:1–5: the greeting and the rescue
Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead— and all the brothers with me, To the churches of Galatia: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (BSB)
Says The letter opens “Paul, an apostle”, then qualifies the title at once. The Greek has no participle “sent”: οὐκ ἀπ’ ἀνθρώπων οὐδὲ δι’ ἀνθρώπου (ouk ap’ anthrōpōn oude di’ anthrōpou, “not from men nor through a man”). ἀπό with the plural names the source; διά with the singular names the channel. The BSB supplies “sent” and renders the second phrase “by man.” The positive clause answers with one διά over “Jesus Christ and God the Father”, “who raised Him from the dead”. Paul writes with “all the brothers with me”, “To the churches of Galatia”. The churches had received his preaching (1:8–9, 11). The wording of 1:1 is treated in Not from men, nor through a man (1:1) and is not taken up again here. On ἀπόστολος as one sent with a commission, see κλητὸς ἀπόστολος ἀφωρισμένος: "called apostle, set apart". The gospel concerning the Son, and the raising from the dead, are already treated in Paul, the gospel of God, and the Son (Romans 1:1–7) and are not taken up again.
Implies A single preposition over Jesus Christ and God the Father joins them as the one channel of the commission, set against both a human source and a human go-between. The same contrast returns in 1:11–12, where the gospel is not according to man and was not received from a man. Because Paul names himself as the sender and writes to churches that had heard him preach, the letter presents itself as his own word to congregations he knew. The persons are real, and the raising of Jesus from the dead is stated as fact.
Uncertain Which “Galatia” is meant in 1:2 is read two ways in the pages logged for this chapter, and no date for the letter is given on those pages. Lightfoot finds “there are many reasons which make it probable that the Galatia of St Paul and St Luke is not the Roman province of that name, but the land of the Gauls” Ramsay states the southern view: “The South Galatian theory is that no churches were founded by Paul in North Galatia; and that when he speaks of the churches of Galatia, he means the four churches in the south of the Province Galatia.” Ramsay writes that it “must be the province, and not simply the region inhabited by the Gauls” Burton (p. xliv) judges the southern view the more probable and takes the letter as sent to the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch. These are their readings; they are set out more fully in Galatia, the churches, and the letter (1:1–2). No verdict is given here. What the text itself states is simpler: the letter is sent to churches, in the plural, and the brothers who are with Paul join him in sending it. The name is not further defined in the chapter, and no date is given in 1:1–5.
Says The greeting continues, “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”. The printed Greek of 1:3 is θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν (theou patros kai kyriou hēmōn, “God the Father and our Lord”). SBLGNT, Tregelles, the Byzantine text, and the Textus Receptus print “our” after “Lord.” Westcott–Hort and NA28 print “our” after “Father,” the order the BSB follows. The unit is only the place of ἡμῶν. On either order the greeting comes from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ together. The evidence and the decision are in καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν / ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου.
Says Verse 4 then names the one “who gave Himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father”. The printed text has ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν (hyper tōn hamartiōn hēmōn, “for our sins”). The Byzantine text, with Tregelles, prints περί; the Textus Receptus here agrees with SBLGNT and Westcott–Hort in reading ὑπέρ. In this period both prepositions are used with “sins” in the sense “for”; on either reading Christ gave himself for our sins. The evidence is in ὑπέρ / περί. The goal is given by ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς (hopōs exelētai hēmas, “in order that he might rescue us”) ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ (ek tou aiōnos tou enestōtos ponērou, “out of the present evil age”), “according to the will of our God and Father”. Verse 5 gives him glory forever. The language of 1:3–5 is treated in Rescue from the present evil age (1:3–5).
Implies The verse names the means of the rescue (he gave himself for our sins), its goal (to rescue us out of the present evil age), and its ground (the will of our God and Father). It does not develop a theory of the atonement; that is not taken up here. The gospel concerning the Son in Romans 1 is pointed to above and is not restated.
Says Early readers fasten on this verse as the letter’s opening theme. Calvin writes, “Who gave himself for our sins. He begins with commending the grace of Christ, in order to recall and fix on Him the attention of the Galatians” Luther writes, “Paul in a manner, in every word, handleth the argument of this epistle. He hath nothing in his mouth but Christ” Wesley writes, “That he might deliver us from the present evil world—from the Guilt, Wickedness, and Misery wherein it is involved” These are their readings of the verse; they are not used to press a theory beyond what 1:4 itself states.
Galatians 1:6–10: no other gospel
I am amazed how quickly you are deserting the One who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is not even a gospel. Evidently some people are troubling you and trying to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be under a curse! As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be under a curse! Am I now seeking the approval of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ. (BSB)
Says After the amen of 1:5 the tone changes at once. “I am amazed how quickly you are deserting the One who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel”. The Greek is εἰς ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον (eis heteron euangelion, “to a different gospel”), and 1:7 continues ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλο (ho ouk estin allo, “which is not another”). The BSB has “which is not even a gospel” and does not render ἄλλο as “another.” “Evidently some people are troubling you and trying to distort the gospel of Christ”. The wording is treated in A different gospel, which is not another (1:6–7). On εὐαγγέλιον, see εὐαγγέλιον θεοῦ: "the gospel of God" and εὐαγγέλιον.
Implies The relative clause denies that the different message is a second gospel. What is on offer is not another gospel of the same kind, but a distortion of the gospel of Christ, and the only reality named behind it is the people who trouble the churches and want to change that gospel. There is one gospel; a message contrary to the one already preached is not another gospel.
Says The warning is then doubled. “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be under a curse”. “As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be under a curse”. The Greek in both verses is ἀνάθεμα ἔστω (anathema estō, “let him be accursed”). The first condition includes the apostle himself and an angel from heaven; the second names “anyone” and looks to the gospel the churches have already received. The language note is Let him be anathema (1:8–9). The earlier use of ἀνάθεμα in Romans 9 is pointed to in ἀνάθεμα εἶναι αὐτὸς ἐγώ / αὐτὸς ἐγὼ ἀνάθεμα εἶναι and Paul's anguish for his kin, Israel's privileges, and Christ "who is God over all" (Romans 9:1–5), and is not taken up again.
Implies Including the apostle and an angel makes the content of the gospel, not the standing of the messenger, the test. Calvin writes that “he declares that the doctrine which he had preached is the only gospel”. Luther writes, “Therefore, he plainly excommunicateth and curseth all teachers in general, himself, his brethren, an angel, and moreover all others whatsoever” Those comments follow the text’s own reach: the curse is pronounced in general, and the speaker does not exempt himself.
Uncertain The force of the anathema is read, on the pages logged for this chapter, as God’s curse on the preacher of another gospel. Lightfoot notes the question “whether it refers to ecclesiastical censure or spiritual condition” and holds that “The latter alone seems tenable” Luther writes, “The Greek word anathema, in Hebrew herem, signifieth a thing accursed, execrable, and detestable, which hath nothing to do, no participation, or communion with God.” Burton takes the word “as one under the curse of God.” and writes, “In this sense the word must be taken in the present passage.” Wesley writes, “preach another gospel, let him be accursed—cut off from Christ and God.” Calvin writes, “Here it denotes cursing” These are their readings; no verdict is given here. The language and historical notes set out the same holders and are not restated beyond this summary.
Says Verse 10 then asks, in the Greek, whether Paul is now persuading men or God, and whether he seeks to please men. “If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ”. The BSB puts the first question as a matter of courting men’s favor; the verb is πείθω (peithō, “persuade”). The condition is contrary to fact: if he were still pleasing men he would not be Christ’s servant. The wording is treated in Persuade and please (1:10).
Implies The condition assumes that he is not, in fact, pleasing men. The “still” looks back to a former course of life, which 1:13–14 will name. The severity of 1:8–9 is of a piece with this claim: a man who can put himself under the anathema is not trimming the message to win human favor.
Says The one they are leaving is “the One who called you by the grace of Christ”. The call in 1:6 and the call in 1:15 are not two different plots: the churches were called in that grace, and Paul himself was called through that grace. The desertion is therefore a turning from the one who called, not only a change of teachers. Verse 6 does not yet name the content of the different message; 1:7 names people who trouble the churches and want to distort the gospel of Christ. The later chapters will take up that distortion; they are not taken up here.
Galatians 1:11–24: the gospel by revelation and Paul’s early years
For I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached was not devised by man. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my former way of life in Judaism, how severely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not rush to consult with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to the apostles who came before me, but I went into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. Only after three years did I go up to Jerusalem to confer with Cephas, and I stayed with him fifteen days. But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. I assure you before God that what I am writing to you is no lie. Later I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. I was personally unknown, however, to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. They only heard the account: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God because of me. (BSB)
Says The claim of 1:1 is now stated of the gospel itself. “For I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached was not devised by man”. “I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ”. The Greek of the last clause is δι’ ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (di’ apokalypseōs Iēsou Christou, “through a revelation of Jesus Christ”). The BSB’s “from” is an English rendering of the genitive; the genitive itself is not the preposition “from.” The language is treated in Not according to man, but through revelation (1:11–12). On ἀποκάλυψις, see ἀποκαλύπτω.
Implies The gospel and the apostleship stand on the same ground: they are not from man. What follows in 1:13–24 is given as the narrative proof of that claim. Paul will show that he was not taught the gospel in Jerusalem, that he went away to Arabia, that his first visit was short and limited, and that the churches of Judea heard of him without knowing him by face.
Uncertain The sense of Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 1:12 is read two ways. Burton writes, “It has been much disputed whether Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ is an objective or subjective genitive, whether Christ is the revealed or the revealer.” He adds, “It is in favour of the former view (1) that Paul is wont to speak of God as the author of revelations; and of Christ as the one revealed, not as the revealer” He also writes, “But these arguments are by no means decisive.” and, “since it is self-evident that if Christ was revealed to him (or in him) God was the revealer.” Lightfoot renders the phrase as “I received it not by instruction from man but by revelation from Christ.” These are their readings; no verdict is given here. Lightfoot also writes, of 1:15–16, “The revelation of His Son in me, the call to preach to the Gentiles, were acts of His good pleasure.” That comment belongs with the call, not as a decision on the genitive.
Says The proof begins with a past the churches already know. “For you have heard of my former way of life in Judaism, how severely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it”. “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers”. The same past is named in 1 Corinthians 15:9 (see Gal 1:13 → 1 Cor 15:9) and in Philippians 3:6; Acts 22:3 speaks of his training. The language is treated in Judaism and zeal for the traditions (1:13–14), and the background in Judaism, zeal, and the ancestral traditions (1:13–14). For zeal for God, including Paul’s past, see Zeal for God: Phinehas, the Maccabees and Paul’s past (10:1–3); that note is pointed to, not taken up again here.
Implies Because 1:13 and 1:23 use the same verb for what Paul did and what the churches of Judea later reported, and because 1 Corinthians 15:9 and Philippians 3:6 say the same, the persecution is presented as a known fact of his life. The call that follows is the turning of that life, not a human promotion.
Says The printed text of 1:15 has no ὁ θεός. It reads, when the one who set him apart from his mother’s womb and called him by his grace was pleased “to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles”. The BSB’s “God” follows the longer reading, which Westcott–Hort print in brackets and which the Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus have in the text. On either reading, the one who set Paul apart and called him is God. The evidence is in — / ὁ θεός. He then says that he did not consult flesh and blood, nor go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before him, but went into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. The echoes of a call from the womb in Jeremiah 1:5 and Isaiah 49:1 are stated from the BSB in Gal 1:15 → Jer 1:5 and Gal 1:15 → Isa 49:1; no Greek Old Testament form is claimed. The danger at Damascus and the escape are pointed to in Gal 1:17 → 2 Cor 11:32–33. Acts 9:19–25 tells of days in Damascus and of the escape, and does not name Arabia. The language of 1:15–16 is treated in Set apart, called, and revealed in me (1:15–16); the Arabia stay in Arabia and Damascus (1:17).
Uncertain The phrase ἐν ἐμοὶ (en emoi, “in me”) is read two ways. Burton writes, “The choice of the word ἀποκαλύπτω, therefore, is favourable to the former of the two views named”, and holds that “the reference of the central term of this sentence to the presentation of Christ to others involves an impossible digression from the theme of the whole passage.” Wesley writes, “To reveal his Son in me—by the powerful Operation of his Spirit, (2 Cor. iv. 6.) as well as to me, by the Heavenly Vision” Calvin writes, “But I consider the Greek phrase ἐν ἐμοὶ, to be a Hebrew idiom for to me” He continues, “The meaning will therefore be, that Christ was revealed to Paul, not that he might alone enjoy, and silently retain in his own bosom the knowledge of Christ, but that he might preach among the Gentiles the Saviour whom he had known.” Lightfoot writes, “It does not speak of a revelation made inwardly to himself, but of a revelation made through him to others.” These are their readings; no verdict is given here.
Uncertain The purpose and place of the Arabia stay are likewise open. Chrysostom writes, “Thus this blessed man, fervent in spirit, straightway undertook to teach wild barbarians, choosing a life full of battle and labor.” Lightfoot writes, “For if we suppose that the Apostle at this critical moment betook himself to the Sinaitic peninsula, the scene of the giving of the law, then his visit to Arabia becomes full of meaning.” Burton judges a time “of retirement in which he should in some measure accomplish this necessary task is both more consistent with his language and in itself more probable than an impetuous plunging into evangelism.” and writes, “Particularly improbable is the selection of Arabia (see below on the meaning of the word) as a place of preaching.” Ramsay marks the steps of the verse: “εὐθέως, the retiring to Arabia; καὶ πάλιν the return to Damascus” Wesley writes, “He presupposes the Journey to Damascus, in which he was converted, as being known to them all.” These are their readings; no verdict is given here. The length of the stay, and how it fits the days of Acts 9:19–25, are not fixed by the text of 1:17.
Says “Only after three years did I go up to Jerusalem to confer with Cephas, and I stayed with him fifteen days”. The Greek is ἱστορῆσαι Κηφᾶν (historēsai Kēphan, “to get to know Cephas”). The printed text has Κηφᾶν; the Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus have Πέτρον. Westcott–Hort, Tregelles, and NA28 agree with SBLGNT in printing Cephas. Both names denote the same apostle; Paul uses Κηφᾶς later in this letter (2:9, 11, 14). The evidence is in Κηφᾶν / Πέτρον. “But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother”. He affirms, “I assure you before God that what I am writing to you is no lie”. “Later I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia”. “I was personally unknown, however, to the churches of Judea that are in Christ”. They only heard that “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy”, and “they glorified God because of me”. The language of 1:18–20 is treated in To get to know Cephas, and except James (1:18–20); the visit and the later movements in Jerusalem, Cephas and James, and Syria and Cilicia (1:18–24). Acts 9:26–27 is pointed to in Gal 1:18 → Acts 9:26–27.
Implies Because Paul names the only two leaders he saw, the length of the stay, and affirms the account before God, he presents his early contact with Jerusalem as short and open to check. The churches of Judea glorify God for the change in him without having known his face; the gospel he now preaches is already news among them, not a lesson he took from them.
Uncertain From what point the three years are counted is read, on the pages logged for this chapter, from the conversion. Lightfoot writes, “Probably from the great epoch of his life, from his conversion.” Burton writes that the “years are therefore doubtless to be reckoned not from his return to Damascus, but from the crisis of his life which preceded his departure from Damascus.” Ramsay too reckons the events of this narrative from the conversion. Calvin writes, “It was not till three years after he had begun to discharge the apostolic office, that he went up to Jerusalem.” Wesley writes, “Then after three years—wherein I had given full Proof of my Apostleship” These are their readings; no verdict is given here.
Uncertain How 1:18–19 stands beside Acts 9:26–30 is also open. Lightfoot holds that “the two accounts are not contradictory”. Calvin writes, “In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke has omitted these three years.” Wesley writes, “Therefore when Barnabas is said to have brought him in to the Apostles, Acts ix. 27. only St. Peter and James are meant.” These are their readings; no verdict is given here. The question is stated, not resolved.
Uncertain The exception of 1:19, “except James, the Lord’s brother”, is read by Lightfoot, Burton, Calvin, and Chrysostom as counting James among the apostles. Lightfoot writes, “It seems then that St James is here called an Apostle, though it does not therefore follow that he was one of the Twelve” Burton writes, “The phrase must probably be taken as stating an exception to the whole of the preceding assertion, and as implying that James was an apostle.” Calvin writes, “as he is here mentioned among the apostles, I do not hold that opinion” Chrysostom writes that “as he considered that he had a share in the august titles of the Apostles, he exalts himself by honoring James” These are their readings; no verdict is given here.
Uncertain In what sense James was “the Lord’s brother” is open; Mark 6:3 names James among the brothers of Jesus, and that verse is pointed to, not taken up again. Burton, keeping a guarded wording, says that the Gospel birth narratives “naturally imply that the early church knew of children of Mary younger than Jesus.” Lightfoot finds “the balance of the argument is against the Helvidian and in favour of the Epiphanian.” Eusebius writes, “This James was called the brother of the Lord because he was known as a son of Joseph, and Joseph was supposed to be the father of Christ” Calvin reports that “others think that he was the son of Joseph by another wife”, and himself writes, “It appears to me, therefore, far more probable, that the person of whom he is speaking is the son of Alpheus.” Chrysostom writes, “he might have shown this by another appellation, and called him the son of Cleophas, as the Evangelist does.”, and writes of James, “although he was not by birth His brother, but only so reputed.” Burton also writes, “Nor is there any positive evidence for the theory that he was older than Jesus, being the son of Joseph and a wife previous to Mary.” These are their readings; they are set out more fully in Early readings of Galatians 1: the curse, and James the Lord’s brother. No verdict is given here. After the visit he went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Acts 9:30 says the brothers sent him from Caesarea to Tarsus; Tarsus is in Cilicia, and that verse is pointed to as context, not used to close the question of how the two accounts stand together. The chapter ends with the churches of Judea glorifying God because of him.
Minor variants
Says The printed Greek of this chapter is SBLGNT throughout. English verse numbers agree with that text; there is no versification-map row. Four units have their own textual notes: the place of ἡμῶν in 1:3 (καὶ κυρίου ἡμῶν / ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου), ὑπέρ / περί in 1:4 (ὑπέρ / περί), the presence or absence of ὁ θεός in 1:15 (— / ὁ θεός), and Κηφᾶν / Πέτρον in 1:18 (Κηφᾶν / Πέτρον). Significant Byzantine and Textus Receptus alternatives are noted there, with brief evidence. Other units that do not change the sense share this box only, and are not discussed elsewhere. At 1:4 the printed text has αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος; the Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus have τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος αἰῶνος. At 1:8 SBLGNT, Tregelles, NA28, the Byzantine text, and the Textus Receptus print εὐαγγελίζηται; Westcott–Hort print εὐαγγελίσηται. The pronoun ὑμῖν in 1:8 is lacking only in the Greek text behind one modern English version and is not a Byzantine or Textus Receptus difference. At 1:10 the Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus add γάρ after εἰ. At 1:11 SBLGNT prints γάρ; the Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus print δέ. At 1:12 SBLGNT, Westcott–Hort, NA28, the Byzantine text, and the Textus Receptus print οὔτε; Tregelles prints οὐδέ. At 1:18 SBLGNT, Tregelles, NA28, the Byzantine text, and the Textus Receptus print ἔτη τρία; Westcott–Hort print τρία ἔτη. None of these lines changes what the verse says.