This narrative is so independent of the account given of Paul’s first meeting with the Twelve in Acts ix. 26-29, that some Critics question the identity of the
Κηφᾶν, καὶ ἐπέμεινα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡμέρας δεκαπέντε" 19. ἕτερον δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ ᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ Κυρίου. 20. ἃ δὲ γράφω ὑμῖν, ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι. 21. Ἔπειτα ἦλθον εἰς τὰ κλίματα τῆς Συρίας καὶ τῆς Κιλικίας"
1Κηφαν NAB 17, εἰς. ; Πετρον NCDEFGKLP.,
two visits. But it is clear that both passages alike refer to Paul's first return to Jerusalem, after a prolonged sojourn at Damascus; and the subtle harmony of the two narratives is as conspicuous as their independence in details. The history states the bare fact that Paul, finding his life in imminent danger from the Jews at Damascus, fled to Jerusalem ; the Epistle explains why he encountered so obvious a danger; the Epistle states that he prolonged his stay to see Peter; the history explains that he was unable to gain access to the Apostles for a time. The history records the principal events of the visit from the historical point of view, ¢.g., the apprehensions felt by the Christian body, the intervention of Bar- nabas, the attempts on Paul's life; the autobiography passes these by as foreign to its purpose, but is far richer in per- sonal details, relating incidentally the date, the motive, and the duration of the visit, and particularising the brethren whom Paul saw on the occasion; where- as in the Acts mention is merely made of the disciples generally.
Ver. το. εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον. εἰ μή may either state an exception to the preceding negative clause (= except, save), or merely qualify it (= but only), as it does in Luke iv. 26, to none of them, sc., the widows in Israel, but only to Sarepta in Sidon ; and in Gal. i. 7, no other Gospel, only (et μή) there are some that pervert the Gospel. The latter appears to be its meaning here. If James had been entitled an Apostle, the author would probably have written that he saw no other Apostles but Peter and James. But here he states emphatically that he saw no second (ἔτε-
v) Apostle, only James. The Epistle, ike the Acts (see xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18), fully recognises the leading position of James in the local Church (cf. ii. 9, 12) ; and the ecclesiastical tradition which entitles him Bishop of Jerusalem corre- sponds to this. All the evidence left of his life suggests that he clung throughout his Christian life to Jerusalem and did not undertake such missionary labours as would entitle him to the designation of Apostle.—rév ἀδελφὸν .. . James is
here described as the brother of the Lord in order to distinguish him from James the son of Zebedee, who was living at the time of Paul’s first visit; but elsewhere as James: after the death of the other James there could be no question who was meant.
Ver. 20, The solemnity of this appeal to God in attestation of His truth marks at once the importance which Paul attached to his independence of human teachers, and the persistency of the misrepresenta- tion to which he had been exposed.— ἰδοὺ. This imperative is always used interjectionally in Scriptures: the sub- sequent ὅτι depends on ἐνώπιον τ. Θεοῦ, which has the force of an attestation.
Vv. 21-23. About ten years of the life of Paul, between his flight from Jerusalem to Tarsus and his return to Jerusalem for the Apostolic Council, are here passed over. They were spent, partly in and around Tarsus and Antioch, partly in the joint mission with Barnabas to Cyprus and Asia Minor. The Galatians were already acquainted with the leading facts of that period, and it was needless to refer to them here: enough that he spent those years, like those at Damascus, in an in- dependent ministry at a distance from Jerusalem. He did indeed repair thither once with Barnabas to alms from Antioch to the Elders; but circum- stances prevented any intercourse with the Twelve at that time: for before they reached the city the Herodian per- secution had begun, and the leading Christians were in peril of death at the hands of Herod. Paul himself can only have paid a secret and hurried visit to the city, and thought it needless appar- ently to mention it in this place.—«A(- ματα. This word denotes the fringes of coastland sloping down from the mountains to the sea in north-western Syria and eastern, é.e. Roman, Cilicia. It is a ig in 2 Cor, xi. 10 to the coastlands of Achaia.