Chapter 1 vs 11-23

Vs 11 For I would have you know,( P A I 1s gnwri,zw "I make known" + sub conj ga,r "for" + D P pron su, "to you") brethren,( V M P avdelfo,j "brothers" ) that the gospel which was preached by me (Ac N S w/d.a. to. euvagge,lion "the gospel" + A P P Ac N S w/d.a. euvaggeli,zw "which had been proclaimed" + prep u`po, w/gen "by, by means of" + G 1s pron evgw, "me") is not according to man. (o[ti c.c. "that" (introduces the content of that which is known) + advers ouvk "not" + P A I 3s eivmi, "it is" + prep w/Ac kata, "according to" + Ac M S a;nqrwpoj "a man"

Vs 12 For I neither received it from man,( neg conj ouvde, "neither + sub conj ga,r "for" + N M S 1s evgw, " I" +prep w/gen para, "from" (indicates the starting point from which an action takes place) + G M S a;nqrwpoj "a man" + A A I 1s paralamba,nw "I received" (to take alongside, to receive)" + Ac N pron 3s auvto,j "it") nor was I taught it, (neg conj ou;te "nor" + A P I 1s dida,skw "was I taught" ) but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. (strong advers avlla, "but" + prep w/gen dia, "through, by way of" + G F S avpoka,luyij "revelation, appearing" + G M S VIhsou/j Cristo,j)

Paul here begins an autobiographical summary that continues to 2:14.
It occupies nearly one-fifth of the whole letter, and so constitutes a substantial part of his argument, and helps us reconstruct at least one element in the situation he faced.
That element took the form of a denial of Pauls independent standing as an apostle.
So, in this section, he must rebut that denial, and to emphasize that he received the gospel that he proclaims, together with the commission to proclaim it, directly from the risen Christ, without any intermediary.
Just as the Pharisees rejected the authority of John the Baptist (Jn 1:19-25) and Jesus (Mat 21:23), the Judaizers called into question Pauls divinely established authority.
What Paul calls here "the gospel which was proclaimed by me" is elsewhere called "the gospel of God" (1Th 2:8) because God is its author; "the gospel of Christ"
(2Co 2:12) because Christ is the subject matter; "or the gospel of God concerning His Son" (Rom 1:1-3).
Other words or phrases used as the object of proclaim indicate the content or substance of the gospel:
Christ Jesus as Lord 2Co 4:5

Christ crucified 1Co 1:23

Christ Jesus our Lord 2Co 2:12

the faith v 23 (i.e. the message of salvation by faith)

peace Eph 2:17

the unsearchable riches of Christ Eph 3:8
But the gospel proclaimed by Paul to the Galatians was the law-free gospel, the gospel to which any addition of requirement or obligation was completely alien.
All Satanic counterfeit religions emphasize the necessity of human works to achieve salvation, while biblical Christianity announces the work is done.
Also, this gospel is the gospel which he received by Divine revelation on the Damascus road, and which he was commissioned to make known among the Gentiles.
It was no gospel according to man for no earthly authority had imparted it to him, neither was it the product of his own reasoning.
His message was contrary to what mankind, in itself, would declare to a needy world the world would declare the necessity of social and economic reform, the need for morality, and of international brotherhood. Cp Gen 11:3-4
Like Cain who despised the way of blood sacrifice, man believes that he can gain the favor of God through his own achievements. Gen 4:3-5, cp Prov 14:12
Paul makes it clear that no man, not those who were in Christ before him, nor even himself, was the source of this gospel it came directly from God, as it did for the other apostles. Cp Jn 6:68
It cannot be inferred from his language that he was denying full humanity to the Lord Jesus Christ (cp vs 1); his readers knew what he meant in denying all human origin or basis to his gospel.
Pauls gospel Jesus Christ is the Son of God; Jesus Christ is the risen Lord was revealed to him on the Damascus Road by the God-man.
No doubt he had heard such claims from his victims in the days of his persecuting zeal, but he rejected those claims as blasphemous until he learned the truth by unmediated disclosure from heaven and the Lord Himself.
By application, if someone will ultimately turn out positive to either the Gospel1 or Gospel2, God will do whatever it takes to bring the truth to them in a way they cannot deny and will therefore accept His essence both demands and ensures it.
On the other hand, nothing says he could not have received information concerning the life of Christ, His post-Resurrection appearances, or other historical facts from those who were eyewitnesses. Cp vs 18; Ac 1:1
Paul regarded the traditions, which he received from the Jerusalem leaders as confirming his own convictions about Jesus, which he received from his conversion and commissioning on the Damascus road.
His opponents claimed that they had received the gospel in its purity, from those who had real authority, i.e. the Jerusalem elders, and Paul was not abiding by their message, (supposedly) that keeping the Law was necessary for salvation.
Just as the Lord Jesus had personally instructed the other 11 apostles, so had Paul been, which was a requirement for apostleship.
While it is certainly legitimate to have a man as a teacher of BD, Pauls authority and message stemmed from the fact that a no mere man had instructed him, but the risen Lord Himself.
Paul himself taught the Christian way of life to others, but his only teacher was the Lord by the Holy Spirit.
The G M S of vIhsouj Cristoj is an objective genitive, which means that Jesus Christ is the object of the verbs received and taught.
That is to say, God the Father was the revealer, Jesus Christ was revealed. Vs 15-16
In the book of Revelation, the source of the revelation is Jesus Christ. Rev 1:8,11ff
However, it was God the Fathers sovereign decision to reveal His Son to Paul at his conversion, and it was at that time he received his gospel.
What happened on the Damascus road was no isolated mystical experience, no flash of insight or conviction (cp Col 2:18), but a personal encounter, the beginning of a personal relationship which became the dominating passion of his life. Phil 3:7-10
Religious experience for Paul, and all adjusted believers, is experience of union with Christ; no mere emotional episode, but a change in life and lifestyle.

Vs 13 For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, ( A A I 2p avkou,w "you have heard of" + sub conj ga,r "for" + Ac F S w/d.a. h` avnastrofh, "conduct, behavior, way of life" + poss adj Ac F 1s evmo,j "my" + indef adv pote, "former, once" + prep w/ D M S w/d.a. evn| o` VIoudai?smo,j "in Judaism" (here used generally of the faith of the Jews, as opposed to Christianity) how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it;( rel conj o[ti "that" + prep w/Ac F S kata, u`perbolh, "unto/toward excess; to an exceeding degree" + I A I 1s diw,kw "I was pursuing; I was persecuting" + Ac F S w/d.a h` evkklhsi,a "the church" (here, the Church Universal) + G M S w/d.a. o` qeo,j "of the God" + c.c. kai, "and"+ I A I 1s porqe,w "was destroying; devastating; laying waste to" + pro Ac F 3s auvto,j "it")

Vs 14 and I was advancing in Judaism ( c.c kai, "and" + I A I 1s proko,ptw "I was making progress, advancing" + prep & L M S w/d.a. evn o` VIoudai?smo,j) beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen,( prep w/Ac M P u`pe,r polu,j "more than (to a higher degree than) many" + Ac M P sunhlikiw,thj "contemporaries; those of the same age" + prep w/L N S evn w/ to, ge,noj "among kind/race" + pron G 1s evgw, "my") being more extremely zealous ( comp adv perissote,rwj "more abundantly" +N M S zhlwth,j "a zealot; fanatic" + P A P N M S u`pa,rcw "being, living as" (being more abundantly a zealot) for my ancestral traditions. (G F P h` patriko,j "ancestral" + pro G M S evgw, "my" + G F P para,dosij "traditions")

Paul proceeds to prove that no man taught him the Truth of the gospel, he did not even arrive at the truth by his own efforts or understanding.
Grace was a concept foreign to Saul the Pharisee, and nothing from his past could have brought him to the gospel, though he diligently sought salvation.
Pauls converts had heard about his former career as a persecutor, both from his own lips (cp Ac 26:9) and, most likely, from the Judaizers.
Paul did not hide his past from his converts, but used it as a testimony to Gods grace: if even he, the foremost sinner among men, attacker of the Church, could be saved, any man could. 1Ti 1:15-16
As seen above, they tried to make Paul to be a man pleaser, pointing out that not long ago, he had not even been a Christian, but an opponent to the truth.
The word conduct (avnastrofh anastrophe ) refers to the way one lives ones life, whether for good (1Ti 4:12) or evil (Eph 4:22).
Pauls every thought, effort, and deed went towards fulfilling his interpretation of Gods will for his life.
Man knows in his heart that he is unrighteous and God is absolute righteousness; he must achieve that level of perfection if he is to have a relationship with Him.
The difference between positive volition and negative volition is how that perfection is achieved we accept it as a gift, they try to prove they deserve it.
By application, positive and negative volition are manifested after salvation in a similar manner: we seek Gods will as He reveals it, they seek to prove they know and live their own interpretation of Truth.
He viewed the Christian community as a heretical sect to be utterly destroyed.
Cp Num 15:30-31
The term Judaism ( vIoudaismoj Ioudaismos) occurs only here and v 14, while the verb form ( vioudaizw ioudaidzo) is found only in 2:14, where it is used of Gentiles living like Jews.
So emphatic was his conduct, that he went beyond all measure to try to fulfill (what he supposed was) Gods will for his life.
If God demanded works for salvation, Paul was determined to accomplish every command required, including the destruction of blasphemers.
Pauls zeal even went beyond that of his teacher, Gamaliel. Ac 22:3 cp Ac 5:34,38-39.
Paul refers to his persecuting activity in much the same way as in Php 3:6, where it is also used as the outstanding token for his one-time zeal for the Law.
1Co 15:9 is Pauls attitude toward that former zeal: in his opinion it should have disqualified him, even after his conversion, from being an apostle of Christ, but for the divine grace which nevertheless commissioned him. Cp 1Ti 1:13
"Persecute" and "destroy" are both in the Imperfect tense, indicating an on-going action he did not just try once and then stop, he was continually taking action against the believers.
Although he does not mention specifically his persecution as being in Jerusalem, the language of Ac 26:11 "persecuted them even to foreign cities" makes it clear he was in the same city as the apostolic leaders.
Luke records that the apostles were able to remain in Jerusalem during the persecution because of the popular good will they enjoyed, and were thus temporarily exempted from the antagonism of the ruling religious authorities. Ac 8:1
By contrast, under the later persecution of Herod Agrippa I, after Peter had begun to fraternize with the Gentiles, the attack was directed particularly against the apostles.
Ac 12:1-4
As long as the local Hebrew Christians remained loyal to temple and law they would be relatively secure, but the abrogation of the law by bringing in Gentiles was what produced such wrath in Saul and the Judaizers.
So Saul "pursued to punish" (diwkw dioko) and "lay waste to" (porqew portheo) the infant Church.
The word "portheo" is used in Classical Greek of besieging and ravaging a city.
"Persecute" refers to the arrests and abuse of believers, "destroy" refers to the destruction of the body of doctrine. Cp v 23
The same word for persecute is used 2x in Sauls conversion by Jesus.
According to Mat 25:40 & 45, whatever actions are taken upon a believer are made as if to Jesus Himself.
Paul also points out that he was not just an average religious type, he was the top of his class in piety and learning.
The word for advance ( prokoptw prokopto ) is used of Jesus "advancing" in wisdom, stature, and grace in Lk 2:52, and refers to mental and spiritual progress. Cp 2Ti 3:13
As in the case of his persecuting and destroying, his advancement was a consistent and continuous action (I A I ); he was not a flash in the pan.
His contemporaries were those of the same age and level of learning. ( sunhlikia sunelikia, compound of sun together with and elikia age)
The countrymen to whom he refers were his fellow Hebrews, who also studied the Pharisaical traditions alongside him. Cp 2Co 11:26
The regular verb for "to be" is not here, rather a verb emphasizing his life as a whole his whole existence was bound up in being the best of the best.
The reason he was so intent on surpassing all others is that he was fanatical about the traditions of his ancestors, as they had (supposedly) been handed down from God.
Ironically, the traditions of men bore little resemblance to the true doctrines, which God had given the Jews under the Old Covenant. Mk 7:1-8; Hos 6:6 dsx
After the Babylonian captivity, the Jewish religious leaders had set about constructing a hedge around the Law, so that no one would even get close to breaking a commandment. Cp Gen 3:2-3 (the first example of legalism)
Saul threw himself into the study of these traditions, surpassing all others because of his tremendous desire to "do Gods will" as he perceived it through his unregenerate mind, and thereby secure his salvation.
To the rabbis, the Mosaic Law in particular and the Word of God in general was not as important as their interpretation of it.
Anyone could, in theory, read the Bible; but to understand it was more important, and so they elevated their (faulty) exegesis to a level above the Scripture itself. Cp Isa 55:9
They even maintained that "Scriptures are water; the Mishnah wine; the Gemera spiced wine" (the two latter formed the Talmud, a rabbinical commentary.
Although the word "Zealot" came to identify a specific political party around 66 AD Paul uses it here in a more general sense.
James and his fellow-elders spoke of the thousands of zealots for the law in Ac 21:20.
Sauls zealotry was shown pre-eminently by his attempt to exterminate the church he was not content to live his own life, he would not allow any other view to be held.
In Rom 10:2 he calls it a godly zeal, but an ignorant one zeal without knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Zeal per se can be either good or bad:
in 2Co 9:2 Paul praises the Corinthians zeal in the Jerusalem relief fund

in 2Co 12:20 the same word is used in a list of vices they are to avoid
Not only the object but the spirit in which it is esteemed determine if it is acceptable or detrimental to the one being zealous.
It is, in English, the difference between zeal and zealotry, the latter being an excessive and unrestrained state of emotion.
The more burdensome and complex the ancestral traditions became, the more he revered and propagated it in his effort to achieve +R.
In Ac 26:5, Pauls defense before Agrippa, Paul says of himself he was raised in the strictest form of Pharisaic tradition, and in Php 3:5f he reiterates that claim.
Prior to his encounter with the risen Christ, there was not the slightest preparation or source for his understanding, acceptance or proclamation of the gospel/good news of salvation by Gods grace apart from works; it was foreign to all his previous thinking.

Vs 15 But when He who had set me apart, ( sub conj o[te "when" + conj de, "but" + A A I 3s euvdoke,w "he was well-pleased" + A A P N M S w/d.a. o` avfori,zw "he who set apart/appointed" + Ac 1s pro evgw, "me" ) even from my mother's womb, ( prep w/Ab evk "out from" + Ab F S koili,a "belly/womb" + G F S mh,thr "of mother" + G M S evgw, "my" ) and called me through His grace,( c.c. kai, "and" + A A P N M S kale,w "having called me" + prep w/gen dia, "through/by means of" + G F S w/d.a. h` ca,rij "the grace" + G M S pro auvto,j "His") was pleased

The Greek word order has been changed for better English: "was pleased" occurs at the end of the sentence in English, while it is at the first in the Greek for emphasis.
The action of the two Aorist participles "set apart" and "called" precedes the action of the main verb, "was well pleased".
"God" is a scribal addition, not appearing in the original text, added for the sake of explicitness; it is the understood though unnamed subject of the verbs. (NAU, KJV, NKV, NIV)
In Rom 1:1, Paul speaks of himself as set apart for the gospel of God.
He was set apart in the sense that God had a specific purpose for him, and his whole life had been directed towards that ultimate goal.
His whole life and the experiences thereof had been arranged by God so that he could and would fulfill His will during his life.
He uses a common Hebraism to express the predetermination of God in eternity past for his calling, salvation, and ministry. Cp Isa 49:1; Jer 1:5
John the Baptist was set apart even before his conception to be the forerunner of the Messiah, and would be filled with the Holy Spirit from the point of his physical birth. Lk 1:15
It was Gods sovereign will from eternity past that Paul would be the twelfth apostle, (there was never a time He did not know that Paul would become a believer) but this verse does not support Calvinism.
Based on His foreknowledge, God knew Paul would be positive to the gospel, when it was presented to him under the best circumstances.
"For many are called, but few are chosen." are the words of Jesus on the subject of Divine predestination and election. Mt 22:14
Rom 8:29-30 gives the order of events in our salvation.
Saul was positive at the point of God-consciousness, and God saw to it, in His sovereign will, that at the appropriate time he heard and received the gospel.
Anyone who desires a relationship with God will receive the message of how to achieve that relationship; those who do not want a relationship may or may not be called, but they will never become believers God is a gentleman.
So, from eternity past God knew what Paul would accomplish in His name, and from the point of his physical birth He set into play the circumstances which would culminate in that accomplishment.
Jacob was chosen to be the patriarch of Israel before he was born, because God knew Esau would be negative, not seeking the will of God above his own. Rom 9:11
The "call" of God is the general invitation of God to unsaved humanity to join Him, as well as the specific call each prospective believer receives unto salvation and the individual ministry or vocation within the church.
Paul had been called on numerous occasions (Acts 26:14), but until the Damascus road he had rejected that call; God responded by giving undeniable evidence that Jesus is the risen Lord.
As with us all, the timing of our salvation-acceptance is set by God.
Paul would not have accepted the gospel at any time previous to his conversion, or else God would have given him the good news at that time.
But when, through Omniscience, God knew that it was the "acceptable time" for Paul to believe, it pleased Him to bring Paul into the Royal Family. 2Co 6:2
The phrase "when He was pleased" is an anthropopathism, a description of Gods essence in terms of a human emotion.
Technically, God is always pleased and never displeased; the emotion is given so that finite man can describe this aspect of His character.
Gods pleasure is the fulfillment of His Plan, and Pauls salvation was the attainment of His foreknowledge with respect to Pauls positive volition.

Vs 16a to reveal His Son in me ( A A If avpokalu,ptw "to reveal; uncover (compound of avpo + kaluptw to bring out from hiding,)" + Ac M S w/d.a. o` ui`o,j "the son"+ G M S 3^rd auvto,j "his" prep w/ L M S evn evgw, "in me") so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, ( sub conj i[na "so that" + P M S 1s euvaggeli,zw "I might proclaim; give the good news" + Ac M S 3^rd auvto,j "him" + prep w/D N P evn o` e;qnoj "in/among the nations")

When Paul wrote to the Corinthians of "seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2Co 4:4); and that God "has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ" (2Co 4:6), he could be quite literal, based on the circumstances of the revelation he experienced.
The revelation of the risen Lord was undeniable, dramatic, life changing, and awesome. Cp Mk 9:2-6
This is the revelation referred to in v 12, in which, as he puts it elsewhere, "I have seen Jesus our Lord" (1Co 9:1), and also "last of all He appeared also to me" (1Co 15:8)
Because of the nature of this revelation, he became physically blind, but the eyes of his soul were, for the first time, opened.
He saw "Jesus our Lord" in a form which identified Him not only as the Son of God but also as the image of God, the reflection of the Divine glory.
We can compare the experience of Isaiah, who was both cleansed and commissioned in the course of his vision of the Glory of God, in Isa 6:1-9.
Also, Ezekiels revelation involved "a figure with the appearance of a man", (Eze 1:26) although this was not Jesus, but a theophany, or visible manifestation of God before the incarnation.
For Paul, the human form manifested the lineaments of a particular person: "the face of Christ".
The appearance of the risen Christ to him was an objective experience, in which Christ took the initiative.
As with Paul so with all believers: it is Christ that comes to us, not we to Him. 1Jo 4:10
The repeated statement "He appeared" of 1Co 15:5-8 means that the appearance of the risen Christ to him was as real as His earlier appearances to Peter, James, and others, not that their experiences were as visionary as Pauls.
By making "His Son" the object of "revealed", Paul implies it was specifically as the Son of God that Jesus appeared to him. Cp Lk 24:13ff, where He appeared to two disciples as a man, without appearance of Deity.
What began as a revelation of Christ to Paul became a revelation of Christ in Paul, as the Spirit began to produce His fruits.
As Paul heralds the riches of Christ to the Gentiles, so Christ is revealed through him; Jesus said the same thing of the Father in Jn 14:7-9
In Ac 26, which is the full account of the revelation, Paul said the risen Lord told him that he was to be sent to the Gentiles; conversion and commission came together.
The irony is that this Pharisee of Pharisees, who would not associate with any outsiders of Judaism, would be the apostle sent to the heathen world.
The Greek word "ina" is used with the subjunctive to indicate a specific purpose.
The reason for the revelation, with its grandeur and glory, was in order that Paul would proclaim Him the Gentile world, in fulfillment of verses like Isa 42:1-6 and Zec 9:10.
The call to be saved was also a call to service God desires that all men serve Him after their salvation. Eph 2:10; 1Ti 2:4
In Rom 1:5 Paul says he was given "grace and apostleship to bring about obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His names sake", a reference to the revelation.
Knowledge of the law was the prerogative of the Jews, but if salvation was bestowed by grace, as it was for Paul, then it was equally accessible to Gentiles not under law.
Since it was Pauls special commission to bring the Gentiles into the family of God, he would no doubt have reacted this strongly to those who were attacking and perverting the minds of his spiritual children. Cp 4:19

Vs 16b - 17 I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, ( adv euvqe,wj "immediately" + neg ouv "not" + A M I 1s prosanati,qhmi "I consulted; went for advice to (lit "go up towards")" + D F S sa,rx "flesh" + c.c. kai, "and" + D N S ai-ma "blood") nor did I go up to Jerusalem ( c.c. ouvde, "nor" + A A I 1s avne,rcomai "did I go up" + prep w/ Ac N P eivj ~Ieroso,luma "to Jerusalem") to those who were apostles before me; ( prep w/ Ac M P pro,j o` avpo,stoloj "to the apostles" + prep w/G M S 1^st pro, evgw, "before (in time) me") but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus. ( superord. conj avlla, "but" + A A I 1s avpe,rcomai "went away" + prep w/Ac F S eivj VArabi,a "to Arabia" c.c. kai, "and" + adv pa,lin "again; once more" + A A I 1s u`postre,fw "I returned" + prep w/Ac F S eivj Damasko,j "to Damascus")

The adverb "immediately" (evuqewj) refers primarily to "went away", not "consult" or "go up".
The verse could read "I did not consult nor did I go up but I immediately went away to Arabia".
For three days after the revelation, Paul was blind, alone with his thoughts and God, led for the first time by the Holy Spirit.
It had been revealed to him that Jesus was the Son of God, and during these three days he contemplated what that meant to his theology and life.
The impact of this revelation was so great that he realized he had to come to a fuller understanding of it before he could correctly relate to God or man, and so he went away to a place he could devote himself to communing with God. Cp Mt 14:23
Having memorized the Scripture (OT), he began to piece together the prophetic announcements of Messiah, and realized they were fulfilled in Jesus. Ps 22
In 2:6 the same verb for "consult" is used in the sense of contribute or confer.
"Flesh and blood" is used in the general sense of humanity. Cp Mt 16:17
Although Ananias was the man God used to confirm what was told to Paul in the revelation, he imparted no Scriptural information to him, other than what Paul already knew. Ac 9:17, 22:13-16, 26:15-18
The term "to go up" is regularly used of going to Jerusalem: cp 2 Ki. 24:10; Jn. 11:55
it was the highest area in terms of geographical altitude

it was the place God chose for His temple and city (Ps 2:6) and thus on a higher spiritual plane
Only here and in 2:1 does Paul use the Hellenistic (Greek) word for Jerusalem, in the other seven passages he uses the Septuagintal Ierousalhm, including Gal 4:25,26.
This form refers to the physical city, the geographical location.
The other spelling refers to the spiritual state of the city, the attitude of the inhabitants.
The Judaizers had come from the city of Jerusalem, and used that name to add to their credentials; Paul asserts he did not go to the city of God to receive his apostolic authority or gospel message.
Although he does not deny the legitimacy of the other 11 apostles, nor even of their extended apostles (James the Lords brother), Paul did not go to them to receive or clarify his gospel, or ask advice on what and how to proclaim it.
Apart from the priority of time of their commission, he admits no difference between his apostleship and theirs. 2:6
Since he had no contact with the Jerusalem elders, they could not have instructed him as to what to teach, as the Judaizers probably maintained.
If he had gone to Jerusalem first, there could have been credence lent to the argument of the Judaizers that the elders had instructed Paul, and afterwards he had changed their message to the law-free version he now taught.
He has already denied that accusation in vs 12, but now he says in effect, that would have been impossible, since I never even met the other apostles until much later in my apostolic career, after I had been an apostle for many years.
As in 2:2, he realized the importance of maintaining contact with the Jerusalem elders, if his ministry was to be effective.
According to Lk 6:13, even during the life of Christ there had been twelve apostles including Judas! but here the reference is to the other 11 men who had seen the risen Lord and had been directly commissioned by Him (Ac 1:2), and the second level of apostles, including James the brother of Jesus and "all the apostles" of 1Co 15:5-7.
Even when he did present his gospel to the elders, many years later, they acknowledged it to be the valid gospel for the Gentiles. 2:2, 7-9
His first act after salvation was not to begin teaching, but to retreat to the wilderness for further reflection and revelation, into the area known as Arabia.
It was in this same area that Moses and Elijah received revelations of their own from YHWH. Ex 3:1f; 1Ki 19
Mt. Horeb is another name for Mt. Sinai, where Moses would later receive the Law from God. Ex 19:18 cp Deu 4:10
What better place for Paul to contemplate the true purpose of the Law than the place it was given to man?
At that time the ruler of Arabia was Aretas IV (9 BC AD 40) who was antagonistic to Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee.
Earlier, Herod had deeply insulted Aretas by divorcing his daughter so as to marry Herodias (Jos., Ant. 18.109-115)
This may explain Aretas willingness to arrest Paul after he had returned to Damascus, as seen in 2Co 11:32
His return to Damascus, 3 years later, was the beginning of his public ministry, although at first he tried to persuade his fellow Jews. Ac 9:20
While it was first at Damascus that he enjoyed Christian fellowship, it was not from them that he derived his gospel.
The Gentile converts needed to understand this was not an offshoot of Judaism, but the good news of acceptance into Gods Plan on His terms, not those of any man or men.

Vs 18 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem ( adv e;peita "then; afterwards" + prep w/ Ac N S meta. e;toj trei/j "after three years" + A A I 1s avne,rcomai "I went up" + prep w/Ac N S eivj ~Ieroso,luma "unto Jerusalem" ) to become acquainted with Cephas, ( A A If i`store,w "to get to know; to visit" + Ac M S Khfa/j "Cephas", Aramaic name for Peter ) and stayed with him fifteen days.( c.c. kai, "and" + A A I 1s evpime,nw " I stayed" + prep w/Ac M S pro,j auvto,j "with him" + Ac F P h`me,ra "days" + Ac F P dekape,nte "fifteen" )

Vs 19 But I did not see any other of the apostles ( Ac M S e[teroj "another; different" different than Peter + c.c. de. "but" + G M P w/d.a. o` avpo,stoloj " of the apostles" + neg ptcl ouvk & A A I 1s ei=don "I did not see") except James, the Lord's brother. ( sub conj & neg ptcl eiv mh, "except" + Ac M S VIa,kwboj "Jacob" Aramaic for James + Ac M S w/d.a. o` avdelfo,j "the brother" + G M S w/d.a. o` ku,rioj "of the Lord")

This is the first of three occurrences of evpeita "next", or "then", indicating a chronological account of Pauls early Christian life. v 21, 2:1
The force of Pauls argument here depends on his giving a consecutive account of his career since his conversion, with special reference to his visits to Jerusalem.
His case would have been weakened if his readers were given reason to suspect that he had omitted any material detail, especially a visit to Jerusalem.
It was within the third year after his conversion that Paul finally went to Jerusalem, after his apostolic ministry and teaching were well established, without any authorization or even recognition on the part of the Jerusalem leaders.
This is the visit recorded in Ac 9:26f, the three years having occurred in Ac 9:19, between the first and second halves of the verse.
Lukes account in Acts is not a strict chronological list, but a list of events that were important in the early Church.
For the first years after his conversion, Paul had not revisited Jerusalem, and by the time he did, his gospel was fully developed.
Paul left Jerusalem around May of 35 AD, and did not return until some time in 38.
It was because of his proclaiming the gospel that he was forced to flee from Damascus (Ac 9:22-26), so he could hardly be said to owe his gospel to the Damascenes.
"Cephas" is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew @k , with a Greek case ending attached, the Greek form being petroj.
Outside Pauls letters, the form Cephas occurs only in Jn 1:42, where Jesus greets Simon, the brother of Andrew, and gives him a new name.
Paul uses the Greek form only in Gal 2:7f, in his record of the second visit to Jerusalem, when the Jerusalem elders agreed it was Pauls place to go to the Gentiles.
When Paul refers to Peter is in regard to Peters place within the Twelve; when he uses Cephas it is in reference to his authority and position as an apostle, having been called specifically by Jesus.
Thus, Paul implies that he and Peter are on equal footing; he makes no effort to degrade Peter to a second level apostle.
Pauls purpose in going to Jerusalem was to interview Peter, both in terms of his leadership position in the church, and for personal information regarding the life of Jesus during the incarnation. Cp Ac 20:35; 1Co 11:24
Although Paul was alive during the ministry of Jesus, there is no record the two ever met; Paul certainly would not have listened to Him teach He opposed the Pharisees!
His three years in Arabia had given him the theology he needed, but from Peter he learned the history of the Man Jesus.
Initially, the apostles refused to see him, for fear he was masquerading as a believer in order to trap them, which further indicates he did not receive instruction from them.
Without the help of Barnabas, he would not even have been able to see them when he did. Ac 9:26-27. It was also important for Paul to maintain ties to the Jerusalem church, in terms of unity among the leadership, and to share information regarding the growth of the Church. Cp ac 11:1, 15:4, 21:19
One piece of information he probably received during this visit was that Jesus, having been raised from death, made several appearances to individuals and groups. 1Co 15:5f
Fifteen days would have given Paul ample time to learn as much about the life of Jesus as Peter could relate, but it would certainly not have been enough time for him to have been transformed from his previous Judaistic theology and tradition.
Nothing happened that could modify Pauls absolute affirmation that he had received his gospel direct from the risen Christ, through no intermediary.
That affirmation (v 12) is the major premise of the argument implicit in the whole autobiographical outline that follows it.
It is Pauls style, after a sweeping affirmation such as he has just made, to introduce some qualification this is demanded by his integrity. Cp 1Co 1:14-16
Another leader of the church he met, and the only other leader, was James, a second line apostle of the church and governmental head thereof.
Paul uses the Greek word for "another of a different kind" to distinguish Peter as the only Apostle, while allowing for James legitimate position as an apostle.
James was an apostle in the wider sense, he had seen the risen Lord and been given a commission from Him.
It is conceivable he met other front-line Apostles during the two-week stay (presuming any of them were present), but he mentions Peter as the one he intended to meet, and mentions James as the only apostle of any other kind, with whom he had any contact.
Thus, no other Apostle of his own standing, or any recognized authority of the Jerusalem church had imparted any wisdom to him.
James is the first of Jesus brothers and an unspecified number of sisters mentioned in Mk 6:3, the children of Joseph and Mary.
Although during the life of Jesus His brothers were not believers in Him as Messiah, (familiarity breeds contempt Mt 13:57) after His resurrection several of them did believe. 1Co 9:5
By about nine years later, James seems to have formed a group distinct from Peters, not in terms of teaching, but as a Pastor-Teacher distinct from an Apostle. Ac 12:17
Paul had only a limited opportunity to confer with "flesh and blood", and he wants his readers to know that he had not met with and been instructed by the Apostolic college.
Although Barnabas would be "sent out" later (Ac 11:22), he was not yet recognized as an apostle of any kind, and would not be called so until he and Paul were "sent out" by the church in Antioch. Ac 13:3, 14:14

Vs 20 (Now in what I am writing to you, ( Ac N P rel pro o[j "that which" + sub conj de, "now" + P A I 1s gra,fw "I am writing" + D P 2 su, "to you") I assure you before God that I am not lying.) (interj ivdou, "behold" + prep w/G M S evnw,pion o` qeo,j "in the presence of/before God" + c.c. o[ti "that" introduces a quote neg ptcl w/ P M I 1s ouv yeu,domaiÅ "I am not lying")

So seriously does Paul take the charges against him, and the defense he offers, that he now invokes God Himself as his witness.

His oath that he is not lying may be based on Roman judicial proceedings, since ivdou was used in the courtroom as a sentential interjection.
It preceded the passing of a sentence, as in the Old English command "hear ye!" and appealed to the authority of the judge to pass that sentence.
Roman legal practice discouraged the use of oaths, unless it was absolutely necessary.
Paul considered this usage to be beyond ordinary importance, since the crux of his whole argument depended on whether he had prolonged contact with the leaders of the Jerusalem church before his own gospel was formed.
Paul was familiar with Roman legal practices, and called upon them when necessary. Ac 16:37, 22:25, 25:11
His point is, by using legal terminology and calling on the ultimate authority, that there is no stronger language he can use to give his readers the greatest possible confidence in what he was writing.
In Mt 5:4, the words of Jesus are recorded concerning the taking of oaths; the traditions of men had downgraded the command to "not bear false witness" to the point it was only necessary to be honest if one took an oath.
Paul certainly would have known of this command, either through direct revelation, or from Peter; therefore, taking an oath in itself indicates how seriously Paul took the content thereof.
He is defending himself against the charge that he proclaims a man-made, second-hand gospel, and that his commission to proclaim it was derived from men.
To this twofold accusation he makes a twofold defense:

his gospel was derived not from mortal man but from God

even if this claim of his could have been disproved, wherever his gospel did originate, it was not from Jerusalem

This vehement solemnity with which Paul calls God to witness that he is not lying implies that another account of the matter was current and had reached his Galatian converts an account which represented him as having gone to Jerusalem to receive from those who were apostles before him the authority to exercise his own ministry.
He was either an authoritative and reliable spokesman for God, or he was a sham.

Vs 21 Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. (adv e;peita "then, next" + A A I 1s e;rcomai "I went" + prep w/Ac N P eivj to. kli,ma "unto the regions" + G F S w/d.a. h` Suri,a "of Syria" + c.c. kai, "and" + G F S w/d.a. h` Kiliki,a "Cilicia")

Vs 22 And I was still unknown by sight (I M I 1s eivmi, "I was" + c.c. de, "but; and yet" + P P P N M 1S avgnoe,w "I was being unknown" + D N S w/d.a. to. pro,swpon "before; lit to the face") to the churches of Judea which were in Christ; ( D F P w/d.a. h` evkklhsi,a "to the churches" + G F S w/d.a. h` VIoudai,a "of Judea" + D F P d.a. h` acts as rel pro "those" + prep w/D M S evn Cristoj "in Christ")

Paul continues, by means of a further evpeita, to assure his readers that no suspicious gaps are left in his narrative.
Between the two Jerusalem visits of 1:18f and 2:1-10 he had no opportunity for contact with the mother-church and its leaders, for after the former visit he set off at once for Syria and Cilicia, remaining in those parts for several years.
At this time Syria and Eastern Cilicia constituted one Roman province, while Tarsus was in the region of Western Cilicia.
Pauls brief statement here is in agreement with the narrative of Ac 9:30 and 11:25f, wherein his friends put him on a ship and sent him to Tarsus after the first of many plots against his life.
He maintained no contact with Jerusalem, but enough was happening for news of Pauls activity to get back to them, as Barnabas knew to look for him to help with the church in Antioch. Ac 11:25
During his stay of many years, he proclaimed the gospel (v 23), but remained independent of the Jerusalem church.
Probably, Paul would have evangelized many of the towns surrounding Tarsus, as well.
After Barnabas came for him, they returned to Antioch, where "they taught considerable numbers" of disciples. Ac 11:26
Paul stayed there until the time was right for the Holy Spirit to call the two of them on their first missionary journey. Ac 13:1-3
After they returned from that journey, he stayed in Antioch "a long time with the disciples". Ac 14:28
In all this time he had not returned or communicated with the Jerusalem church, or any other church in all of Israel.
The Roman province of Judea included all Israel, Samaria, and Judea; and Paul consistently used the Roman province designation for an area.
The periphrastic construction (a round about way of saying something) of the Imperfect tense of eivmi and the participle of avgnoew emphasizes the continuity state or action indicated by the main verb, Paul says that at no time was he not being unknown, i.e. he never even visited Judea.
If, as the Acts record implies, some of the Damascus disciples were those who fled the persecution after the death of Stephen, it is likely many of them also fled to neighboring towns in Judea. Ac 9:2
"Not known by sight" means not personally known, since many of those churches contained members who had once been persecuted by him, and so would certainly have known what he looked like. v23

Vs 23 but only, they kept hearing,( adv mo,noj "only" + sub conj de, "but" + P A P N M P avkou,w "hearing" + A A I 3p eivmi, "they were" + c.c. sets up an indirect quote o[ti ) "He who once persecuted us (P A P N M S w/d.a. o` diw,kw "he who persecuted + Ac P 1 evgw, "us" + adv pote "formerly") is now preaching the faith (adv nu/n "now" + P M I 3s euvaggeli,zw "is proclaiming" + Ac F S w/d.a. h` pi,stij "the faith") which he once tried to destroy." ( rel pro Ac F S o[j "which" + adv pote, "formerly" + I A I 3s porqe,w " he destroyed")

Vs 24 And they were glorifying God because of me. ( c.c. kai, "and" + I A I 3p doxa,zw "they were glorifying" prep w/I S pro evn evgw, "by me by means of, " + Ac M S w/d.a. o` qeo,j)

As in v 22, the periphrastic construction emphasizes the continuous or repeated character of the action.

The participle refers back to "the churches", specifically the members thereof.

The words "that" (o`ti) introduces do not convey the direct speech of those from whom the reports originated, but the speech of those in Judea who received the reports.
It was not the new converts in Syria and Cilicia that referred to Paul as "our former persecutor", it was the Judeans.
"Faith" here is practically synonymous with "gospel", referring to the faith received and practiced by believers. Cp Jud 1:3
The same two words found in v13, "persecute" and "destroy" are found here, since Paul persecuted the members of the Church, and tried to destroy the body of their doctrine.
There was no difference in emphasis or content between the gospel as they understood it and as Paul was proclaiming it; they recognized that Paul was now teaching the very Truth he had so vehemently opposed in his earlier career.
The Judean churches heard Paul was proclaiming the same gospel they had been, and glorified God for it if they had demanded ritual works for salvation, they would have criticized him instead.
Not only was Paul unknown by sight to the Judean churches, his gospel could not have come from them.
Yet, they recognized his gospel at once as that which they had proclaimed, identical to that which the Apostles taught.
What Peter, James and John did in 2:9, the country churches had already done they had accorded full status and recognition to Paul and his message.
The Imperfect tense indicates repeated action, so that every time they heard such news they "glorified God".
The conversion and apostolic witness of the persecutor brings glory and praise to God.
The agitators may have denounced Paul to the Galatians as one who formerly persecuted the saints; Pauls response was to tell how the persecuted saints came to glorify God for what He had wrought in and through the former persecutor.
Pauls point through all this has been that the argument of the Judaizers is absurd on the surface; the Jerusalem church had long since recognized his Apostolic office and authority (not that Paul needed their recognition).