Galatians 1:17

The epistle which we also allow to be the most decisive against Judaism, is that wherein the apostle instructs the Galatians. For the abolition of the ancient law we fully admit, and hold that it actually proceeds from the dispensation of the Creator, a point which we have already often treated in the course of our discussion, when we showed that the innovation was foretold by the prophets of our God. Now, if the Creator indeed promised that “the ancient things should pass away,” to be superseded by a new course of things which should arise, whilst Christ marks the period of the separation when He says, “The law and the prophets were until John”, thus making the Baptist the limit between the two dispensations of the old things then terminating, and the new things then beginning, the apostle cannot of course do otherwise, (coming as he does) in Christ, who was revealed after John, than in …

One may well be much at a loss here to understand how it is that, whereas in the Epistle to the Galatians Paul says, “I went not to Jerusalem,” but “into Arabia” and “to Damascus,” and, “After three years I went up to Jerusalem,” and “to see Peter” ( Gal. i. 17 ), ( ἱστορἥσαι Cat.) here the writer says the contrary. (There, Paul says) “And none of the Apostles saw I; but here, it is said (Barnabas), brought him to the Apostles.”, Well, then, either (Paul) means, “I went not up with intent to refer or attach myself to them ( ἀναθέσθαι ), for what saith he? “I referred not myself, neither went I to Jerusalem to those who were Apostles before me:” or else, that the laying await for him in Damascus was after his return from Arabia; or else, again, that the visit to Jerusalem was after he came from Arabia. …

Ver. 17 . “Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were Apostles before me.”

Ver. 17 . “But I went away into Arabia.” Behold a fervent soul! he longed to occupy regions not yet tilled, but lying in a wild state. Had he remained with the Apostles, as he had nothing to learn, his preaching would have been straitened, for it behooved them to spread the word every where. Thus this blessed man, fervent in spirit, straightway undertook to teach wild barbarians, choosing a life full of battle and labor. Having said, “I went into Arabia,” he adds, “and again I returned unto Damascus.” Here observe his humility; he speaks not of his successes, nor of whom or of how many he instructed. Yet such was his zeal immediately on his baptism, that he confounded the Jews, and so exasperated them, that they and the Greeks lay in wait for him with a view to kill him. …

Ver. 17 . “And again I returned unto Damascus.”

Orth. Hear now the holy Paul when he says “But when it pleased God who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his son in me that I might preach him among the heathen, immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood neither went I up to them that were apostles before me.” Does he so style the apostles because he blames them?

2. But why should I confine my allusions to the men of this world, when the Apostle Paul, the chosen vessel the doctor of the Gentiles, who could boldly say: “Do ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me?” knowing that he really had within him that greatest of guests, when even he after visiting Damascus and Arabia “went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and abode with him fifteen days.” For he who was to be a preacher to the Gentiles had to be instructed in the mystical numbers seven and eight. And again fourteen years after he took Barnabas and Titus and communicated his gospel to the apostles lest by any means he should have run or had run in vain. Spoken words possess an indefinable hidden power, and teaching that passed directly from the mouth of the speaker into the ears of the disciples is more impressive than any other. …