Gal_1:7. The expression just used,
εἰς
ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον
, was a paradoxical one, for in the true sense there is only one gospel: it seems to presuppose the existence of several
εὐαγγέλια
, but only serves to bring into clearer light the misleading efforts of the Judaists, and in this sense the apostle now explains it.
ὅ
οὐκ
ἔστιν
ἄλλο
,
εἰ
μή
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] which
ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον
, to which ye have fallen away, is not another, not a second gospel, alongside of that by means of which ye were called (
ἄλλο
, not
ἕτερον
again), except there are certain persons who perplex you, etc. That is, this
ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον
is not another by the side of the former, only there are certain persons who perplex you; so that in this respect only can we speak of
ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον
as if it were an
ἄλλο
. So in substance Wieseler and Hofmann; comp. Matthias. It must be observed that the emphasis is laid first on
οὐκ
and then on
ἄλλο
; so that, although Paul has previously said
εἰς
ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον
, he yet guards the oneness of the gospel, and represents that to which he applied the words
ἕτερον
εὐαγγ
. as only the corruption and perversion of the one (of the
εὐαγγ
.
τοῦ
καλέσαντος
ὑμᾶς
ἐν
χάριτι
Χριστοῦ
). Thus
εἰ
μή
retains its general meaning nisi, without any need to assume (with Matthies) an abbreviation for
εἰ
μὴ
ἄλλο
ἐστὶ
διὰ
τοῦτο
,
ὅτι
τινές
εἰσιν
οἱ
ταράσσοντες
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.[18] The two emphatic words
ἕτερον
and
ἌΛΛΟ
preserve, however, their difference in sense:
ἌΛΛΟ
meaning absolutely another, that is, a second likewise existing (besides the one gospel); and
ἕτερον
one of another kind, different (
ἕτερον
καὶ
ἀνόμοιον
Plat. Conv. p. 186 B). Dem. 911. 7; Soph. Phil. 501, O. C. 1446; Xen. Anab. vi. 4. 8 (and Krüger in loc.); Wis_7:5; Jdt_8:20. In the N.T., comp. especially 1Co_12:8-10; 1Co_15:40; 2Co_11:4; Act_4:12; also 1Co_14:21; Rom_7:23; Mar_16:12; Luk_9:29. Comp. also the expression
ἕτερον
παρά
τι
, Stallbaum, ad Plat. Phaed. p. 71 A., Rep. p. 337 E. The interpretation most generally received (Peschito, Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theodoret, Erasmus, Luther, Castalio, Beza, Wolf, Bengel, and many others; also Morus, Koppe, Borger, Flatt, Usteri, de Wette, Hilgenfeld) connects
ὅ
οὐκ
ἔστιν
ἄλλο
merely with
ΕὐΑΓΓΈΛΙΟΝ
,[19] and for the most part understands
εἰ
μή
adversatively, “Neque tamen est ulla alia doctrina de Jesu Christo vera; sunt vero homines,” etc., Koppe. Against this interpretation may be urged, first, the fact that
ἝΤΕΡΟΝ
previously had the chief emphasis laid on it, and is therefore quite unwarrantably excluded from the reference of the relative which follows; secondly, that Paul must have logically used some such expression as
ΜῊ
ὌΝΤΟς
ἈΛΛΟῦ
; and lastly, that
ΕἸ
ΜΉ
never means anything else than nisi, not even in passages such as Gal_2:16; Mat_12:4 (see on this passage); Luk_4:26; 1Co_7:17; and Rev_9:4; Rev_21:27. Comp. Hom. Od. xii. 325 f.,
οὐδέ
τις
ἄλλος
γίγνετʼ
ἔπειτʼ
ἀνέμων
,
εἰ
μὴ
Εὐρός
τε
Νότος
τε
, and the passages in Poppo, ad Thuc. III. 1, p. 216. Others, as Calvin, Grotius (not Calovius), Homberg, Winer, Rückert, Olshausen, refer
ὅ
to the whole contents of
ὍΤΙ
ΟὝΤΩ
ΤΑΧΈΩς
…
ΕὐΑΓΓΈΛΙΟΝ
, “quod quidem (sc. vos deficere a Christo) non est aliud, nisi, etc., the case is not otherwise than” (Winer). But by this interpretation the whole point of the relation, so Pauline in its character, which
ὅ
οὐκ
ἔστιν
ἄλλο
bears to
ἝΤΕΡΟΝ
, is lost; and why should the more special explanation of the deficere a Christo be annexed in so emphatic a form, and not by a simple
γάρ
or the like? Lastly, Schott (so also Cornelius a Lapide) looks upon
Ὅ
ΟὐΚ
ἜΣΤΙΝ
ἌΛΛΟ
as a parenthesis, and makes
ΕἸ
ΜΉ
ΤΙΝΕς
Κ
.
Τ
.
Λ
. depend on
ΘΑΥΜΆΖΩ
Κ
.
Τ
.
Λ
.; so that that, which is expressed in the words
ΘΑΥΜΆΖΩ
Κ
.
Τ
.
Λ
., by
ΕἸ
ΜΉ
ΤΙΝΕς
Κ
.
Τ
.
Λ
. “limitibus circumscribatur proferenda defectionis causa, qua perpendenda illud
θαυμάζειν
vel minuatur vel tollatur.” This is incorrect, for logically Paul must have written
ἐθαύμαζον
ἄν
…
εἰ
μή
τινες
ἦσαν
; and with what arbitrary artifice
Ὅ
ΟὐΚ
ἜΣΤΙΝ
ἌΛΛΟ
is thus set aside and, as it were, abandoned, and yet the reference of the
Ὅ
to the emphatic
ἝΤΕΡΟΝ
is assumed!
ΟἹ
ΤΑΡΆΣΣΟΝΤΕς
ὙΜᾶς
] The participle with the article designates the
ΤΙΝΈς
as those whose characteristic was the
ΤΑΡΆΣΣΕΙΝ
of the Galatians, as persons who dealt in this, who were occupied with it. Comp. the very usual
ΕἸΣῚΝ
ΟἹ
ΛΈΓΟΝΤΕς
; also Luk_18:9; Col_2:8. See generally Winer, p. 104 [E. T. 136]; Krüger, § 50. 4. 3; Fritzsche, Quaest. Luk. p. 18; Dissen, ad Dem. de Cor. p. 238. On
ταράσσειν
, in the sense of perplexing the faith and principles, comp. here and Gal_5:10, especially Act_15:24; Sir_28:9.
ΚΑῚ
ΘΈΛΟΝΤΕς
ΜΕΤΑΣΤΡΈΨΑΙ
] “re ipsa non poterant, volebant tamen obnixe,” Bengel; “volunt … sed non valent,” Jerome. On the other hand, the
ταράσσειν
of the Galatians actually took place.
The article before
ταρ
. refers to
ΘΈΛΟΝΤΕς
as well. See Seidler, ad Eur. El. 429; Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 52; Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. i. 1. 19.
μεταστρέψαι
, to pervert, that is, to alter so that it acquires an entirely opposite nature. Comp. LXX. 1Sa_10:9; Sir_11:31; Hom. Il. xv. 203; Dem. 1032. 1.
τὸ
εὐαγγ
.
τοῦ
Χ
.] see generally on Mar_1:1. The genitive is here not auctoris, but, as expressing the specific characteristic of the one only gospel in contradistinction to those who were perplexing the Galatians, objecti (concerning Christ). This is evident from Gal_1:6, where
ἐν
χάριτι
Χριστοῦ
indicates the contents of the gospel.
[18] Fritzsche, ad Marc. vi. 5, takes
εἰ
μή
ironically, and
τινές
in the well-known sense, people of importance (see on Act_5:36, and Hermann, ad Viger. p. 731): “nisi forte magni est facienda eorum auctoritas, qui,” etc. But the article which follows renders this interpretation not at all necessary (see below). Besides, in this sense Paul uses only the neuter (see Gal_2:6, Gal_6:3; 1Co_3:7). Lastly, he is fond of designating false teachers, adversaries, etc., as
τινές
, that is, quidam, quos nominare nolo (Hermann, ad Viger. l.c.). See 1Co_4:18; 2Co_3:1; Gal_2:12; 1Co_15:12; 1Ti_1:3.
[19] So already the Marcionites, who proved from our passage that there was no other gospel than theirs! See Chrysostom in loc.