Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Galatians 1:8

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

8. You have listened to these false teachers. But the Gospel is one and unchangeable, admitting of no addition or modification. Even though I, Paul, and those who, as Timothy, Titus and Silas, are like minded with me nay, even though an Angel from heaven should preach anything as supplementary to that which I have preached, let him be accursed.

any other gospel ] It is impossible to translate this verse literally. The passage implies the perfection of the Gospel which Paul had preached. To add to it was to impugn this perfection. “If any man preach to you as Gospel anything besides that which we have preached.” Romanist writers contend for the rendering ‘ against ’. But in this case ‘besides’ is ‘against’.

accursed ] lit. anathema, cut off, not from the Communion of the Church (which could not apply to an angel), but from the favour of God. It is instructive to notice that the Council of Trent pronounces anathema against those who do not regard the Apocryphal books as sacred and Canonical Scripture, or who knowingly and deliberately despise the unwritten traditions of the Church. Conc. Trid. Sess. iv.

The word ‘anathema’, rendered by ‘accursed’ in the A.V. is the Septuagint equivalent of the Hebrew (Deu 7:26; Jos 6:17-18, &c.), and is used to denote a person or thing devoted to destruction, because accursed of God. The exact expression occurs in only one other passage of the N. T., 1Co 16:22, “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.” How are we to understand these strong expressions? Surely St Paul is not imprecating a curse on every man (or angel) who should propagate false doctrine, and on every professing Christian who does not love the Lord Jesus. He would have prayed for such an one, and have bidden his converts pray that God would “bring into the way of truth all such as have erred and are deceived”. His meaning is, “Let such an one be regarded by you as under wrath and curse of Almighty God.” Solemn words, so understood, and full of warning. This view of their force may be illustrated by our Lord’s language, “ Let him be unto thee as a heathen and a publican,” Mat 18:17.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

But though we – That is, we the apostles. Probably, he refers particularly to himself, as the plural is often used by Paul when speaking of himself. He alludes here, possibly, to a charge which was brought against him by the false teachers in Galatia, that he had changed his views since he came among them, and now preached differently from what he did then; see the introduction. They endeavored probably to fortify their own opinions in regard to the obligations of the Mosaic law, by affirming, that though Paul when he was among them had maintained that the observance of the Law was not necessary to salvation, yet that he had changed his views, and now held the same doctrine on the subject which they did. What they relied on in support of this opinion is unknown. It is certain, however, that Paul did, on some occasions (see the note at Act 21:21-26), comply with the Jewish rites, and it is not improbable that they were acquainted with that fact, and interpreted it as proving that he had changed his sentiments on the subject.

At all events, it would make their allegation plausible that Paul was now in favor of the observance of the Jewish rites, and that if he had ever taught differently, he must now have changed his opinion. Paul therefore begins the discussion by denying this in the most solemn manner. He affirms that the gospel which he had at first preached to them was the true gospel. It contained the great doctrines of salvation. It was to be regarded by them as a fixed and settled point, that there was no other way of salvation but by the merits of the Saviour. No matter who taught anything else; no matter though it be alleged that he bad changed his mind; no matter even though he should preach another gospel; and no matter though an angel from heaven should declare any other mode of salvation, it was to be held as a fixed and settled position, that the true gospel had been preached to them at first. We are not to suppose that Paul admitted that he had changed his mind, or that the inferences of the false teachers there were well-founded, but we are to understand this as affirming in the most solemn manner that the true gospel, and the only method of salvation, had been preached among them at first.

Or an angel from heaven – This is a very strong rhetorical mode of expression. It is not to be supposed that an angel from heaven would preach any other than the true gospel. But Paul wishes to put the strongest possible case, and to affirm in the strongest manner possible, that the true gospel had been preached to them. The great system of salvation had been taught; and no other was to be admitted, no matter who preached it; no matter what the character or rank of the preacher: and no matter with what imposing claims he came. It follows from this, that the mere rank, character, talent, eloquence, or piety of a preacher does not of necessity give his doctrine a claim to our belief, or prove that his gospel is true. Great talents may be prostituted; and great sanctity of manner, and even holiness of character, may be in error; and no matter what may be the rank, and talents, and eloquence, and piety of the preacher, if he does not accord with the gospel which was first preached, he is to be held accursed.

Preach any other gospel … – See the note at Gal 1:6. Any gospel that differs from that which was first preached to you, any system of doctrines which goes to deny the necessity of simple dependence on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation.

Let him be accursed – Greek anathema (anathema). On the meaning of this word, see the notes at 1Co 12:3; 1Co 16:22, note. It is not improperly here rendered accursed, or devoted to destruction. The object of Paul is to express the greatest possible abhorrence of any other doctrine than that which he had himself preached. So great was his detestation of it, that, says Luther, he casteth out very flames of fire, and his zeal is so fervent, that he beginneth almost to curse the angels. It follows from this:

(1) That any other doctrine than what is proclaimed in the Bible on the subject of justification is to be rejected and treated with abhorrence, no matter what the rank, talent, or eloquence of him who defends it.

(2) That we are not to patronise or countenance such preachers. No matter what their zeal or their apparent sincerity, or their apparent sanctity, or their apparent success, or their real boldness in rebuking vice, we are to withdraw from them.

Cease, my son, said Solomon, to hear the instruction that causes to err from the words of knowledge; Pro 19:27. Especially are we to withdraw wholly from that instruction which goes to deny the great doctrines of salvation; that pure gospel which the Lord Jesus and the apostle taught. If Paul would regard even an angel as doomed to destruction, and as held accursed, should he preach any other doctrine, assuredly we should not be found to lend our countenance to it, nor should we patronise it by attending on such a ministry. Who would desire to attend on the ministry of even an angel if he was to be held accursed? How much less the ministry of a man preaching the same doctrine! It does not follow from this, however, that we are to treat others with severity of language or with the language of cursing. They must answer to God. We are to withdraw from their teaching; we are to regard the doctrines with abhorrence; and we are not to lend our countenance to them. To their own master they stand or fall; but what must be the doom of a teacher whom an inspired man has said should be regarded as accursed! It may be added, how responsible is the ministerial office! How fearful the account which the ministers of religion must render! How much prayer, and study, and effort are needed that they may be able to understand the true gospel, and that they may not be led into error, or lead others into error.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Gal 1:8-9

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you.

St. Pauls protestation against seducers

I. The miscarriage supposed–Though we, or an angel, etc.

1. Not persons of the greatest interest. We, who have this relation to you as Pastors and Teachers; we, whom at present you esteem; let neither our relation to you, nor your affection to us, prevail in this particular. Friends are no friends when they go about to divide us from the great Friend of all. We–for our number–Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; nor to think evil. In which good counsel of the apostle take notice of his sincerity and ingenuity of disposition, in that he would not have so much as himself to be taken into consideration to the prejudice or disadvantage of the gospel.

2. Not persons of the greatest perfections–Or an angel from heaven.

Three kinds of perfection are here expressed.

1. The perfection of parts and understanding, and natural abilities. The greatest learning is not to be heard to the disparagement of truth.

2. The perfection of grace and spiritual endowments. The greatest holiness is not to be made a patron of error. Satan takes advantage of reputed goodness to wind others into labyrinths of opinion and practice.

3. The perfection of employment or manner of dispensation. An angel from heaven. The highest revelations are not to be heard against Scripture.

And for these cases in which some indulgence and freedom is to be granted, as in smaller matters, yet respect is to be had to the principles whereupon this is granted.

1. That it be not out of an indifferency and neutrality in religion.

2. That it proceed not from corruption and carnal policy. Bear with me; let alone my errors; I will pardon yours; which people cry up charity in such matters that they may better hide their own unsoundness.

In this passage there are divers gradations.

1. That the apostle lays this grievous and heavy censure not so much upon the opinion simply considered, or privately enjoyed, but upon the vent and communication of it in preaching (1Ti 6:3; Tit 1:10-11; Mat 5:19).

2. It is not preaching at large, but to you; there is an emphasis upon his hearers. Of all false teachers there are none like seducers.

3. There is an emphasis also upon the doctrine. There is a caution against false doctrine; also against new doctrine.

II. The caution or denunciation of punishment inferred upon it–Let him be accursed. There are two things which require to be unfolded.

1. The apostles authority.

2. The apostles charity. This does not give allowance to others lightly and from a private spirit to be full of imprecations. Observe in this emphasis his confidence and firm persuasion of the truth which he had taught and delivered.

Preachers have need to be well assured of the truth of that which they teach.

1. Because they deal in matters of great importance. They speak on matters of life and death.

2. There are many more whose judgments do depend upon it.

3. For the better enforcing of the truth itself. The confidence of the preacher stirs up belief in the hearer. But sometimes the more confident are the most ignorant.

It is not a confidence of presumption but of well-grounded knowledge; not of fancy but of assurance.

1. The apostles zeal in the cause of Christ. There is great earnestness expressed in this simple proposition of the text.

2. His impartiality.

3. His constancy. As we said before (Gal 1:9). How far this was not the same in the ninth verse which he said in the eighth. To take notice of the difference, how far it was not the same; for this there is a double alteration, the one in the expression of the preacher, and the other in the expression of the doctrine: for the preacher, that is signified in the eighth verse–We, or an angel from heaven; but in the ninth indefinitely–If any one. Then as to the doctrine in the eighth verse it is laid down under this phrase–which we have preached. That which ye have received is more than what we have preached.

1. His constancy as to his doctrine.

(1) The same for matter.

(2) The same as to the quality of it.

2. The constancy to the censure which he imposed. This threefold.

(1) The inflexibility and unvariableness of the gospel and doctrine of Christ.

(2) The duties of the hearers of it. Not to receive all we hear without consideration.

(3) The heresy of false teachers. (T. Horton, D. D.)

Orthodoxy relates to the matter of preaching more than to the manner

There are divers improvements and modifications of the same truth, according to the various gifts and abilities which God communicates to His servants, some in one kind, and some in another. Ye shall have some kind of persons who would confine all kind of preachers to one and the same kind of way and method of preaching. This is a business which is not to be expected, neither does the apostle urge it in this Scripture, but in the allowing to every one that gift and manner of preaching which is most agreeable to himself (so it be grave and sober, and proper, and becoming the majesty of the gospel), he does limit them only for matter to the doctrine of the Scripture; that there be nothing delivered but what does consist with that, and which either directly or by consequent is to be found in it. (T. Horton, D. D.)

The gospel unchangeable

First, we have here set before us the inflexibility and unvariableness of the gospel and doctrine of Christ; that it is a thing which does not change with times, or persons, or conditions, but is still one and the same, otherwise the apostle could not have been thus absolute and peremptory about it. What was religion formerly, is religion still; and what is now religion, was religion many years ago in the genera-lions which are past, and will be, and must be likewise to the end of the world. We speak now in regard of the things themselves in their own nature. Indeed mens opinions alter and vary about them, but the points themselves are still the same: we can have no new gospel, nor new Jesus, nor new Spirit of God, as the apostle seems to imply in the Scripture before alleged. All these things are unalterable, and inviolable, and indispensable; theres no changing, nor bartering of them. Look as the principles of nature are immutable, so likewise the principles of grace. That the principles of nature are so is very clear; reason is the same in all men, and in all nations, and in all ages, and the same common principles of it are scattered and dispersed, and communicated to the whole world. This holds also (by a proportion) as to the principles of religion and Christianity; though so many have not these principles in them, as have the principles of nature: yet so many as have them, they have them as immutably and unchangeably, one as the other; and ye may as soon rase out these, as ye may rase out them. The ground hereof is this: Because these things are laid in the nature of God Himself, who alters not; as God Himself is unchangeable, so is His truth which issues and proceeds from Himself. And such a kind of thing is the gospel, it is an extract and emanation from God; it was hid in Him, and it does spring out, and flow forth from Him. (T. Horton, D. D.)

The receiver of false doctrine as bad as the preacher of it

And therefore ye may again take notice of it, that it is not only said, Besides what we have preached, but What ye have received. The receiver is as bad as the thief in this particular: and as it is a cursed thing to scatter error, so it is as cursed a thing to take it up, and carry it home, and keep it by us, or nourish it with us; which therefore we should now all be persuaded (in the fear of God) to avoid and shun what we can. (T. Horton, D. D.)

The danger of adding to the doctrine of the gospel

The occasion of these words. The Sadducees urged the necessity of circumcision, and keeping the law of Moses; thus altering the terms and conditions of religion they made it quite another thing from what our Saviour intended.

I. That the addition of anything to the Christian religion as necessary to be believed or practised in order to salvation, is a perverting of the gospel of Christ, and preaching another gospel.

II. No pretence of infallibility is sufficient to authorize and warrant the addition of anything to the Christian doctrine, as necessary to be believed or practised, in order to salvation.

III. Christians may judge and discern when another gospel is preached, when new articles of faith, or points of practice not enjoined by the gospel, are imposed upon Christians.

IV. I proceed to the fourth observation, which is plainly consequent from those laid down before; namely, that since the declaration of the gospel, and the confirmation given to it, there is no authority in the Christian Church to impose upon Christians anything, as of necessity to salvation, which the gospel hath not made so.

V. It follows likewise from the foregoing observations, that there is no visible judge (how much soever he may pretend to infallibility), to whose determination and decision, in matters of faith and practice necessary to salvation, Christians are bound to submit, without examination, whether those things be agreeable to the doctrine of the gospel, or not.

VI. and last observation from the text; that whosoever teacheth anything, as of necessity to salvation to be believed or practised, besides what the gospel of Christ hath made necessary, does fall under the anathema here in the text; because they that do so, do, according to the mind of St. Paul, pervert the gospel of Christ, and preach another gospel. (J. Tillotson, D. D.)

The preaching of a false gospel a great evil

I. There is a true gospel.

1. He was convinced of the truth of the gospel, because it had been made known to him by Divine revelation.

2. He was convinced of the truth of the gospel, because of the change if had wrought in him.

3. He was assured of the truth of the gospel by the manifestations of its power in others.

II. There is a false gospel.

1. It was a false gospel to teach that there was any other plan by which a sinner could be justified than by believing upon Jesus Christ.

2. It was a false gospel to teach that believers ought to obey the ceremonial law.

III. The publication of a false gospel is a great evil.

1. The publication of a false gospel is ruinous to man.

2. The publication of a false gospel is dishonouring to God.

Lessons:

1. Amid the various methods by which the truth of the gospel is established, there is some one in particular that suits the condition of every man.

2. On the part of those who labour in the gospel, there should be the deepest and most solemn conviction concerning the truth they declare.

3. Faith in the true gospel is essential to salvation; without it, the soul is accursed. (Richard Nicholls.)

False teachers cursed

As he is a traitor to his prince who taketh upon him to coin money out of a base metal, yea, although in the stamp he putteth for a show the image of the prince, so he that shall broach any doctrine that cometh not from God, whatsoever he say for it, or whatsoever gloss he set on it, he is a traitor unto God, yea, in truth, a cursed traitor, though he were an angel from heaven. (T. Boston.)

False teaching ruinous to souls

In the war on the Rhine, in 1794, the French got possession of the village of Rhinthal by a very curious ruse de guerre of one Joseph Werck, a trumpeter. This village was maintained by an Austrian party of six hundred hussars. Two companies of foot were ordered to make an attack on it at ten oclock at night. The Austrians had been apprised of the intended attack, and were drawn up ready to charge on the assailing party. On perceiving this, Werck detached himself from his own party, and contrived, by favour of the darkness, to slip into the midst of the enemy; when, taking his trumpet, he first sounded the rally in the Austrian manner, and, next moment, the retreat. The Austrians, deceived by the signal, were off in an instant at fall gallop; and the French became masters of the village without striking a blow. (Percy.)

False teachers useless

A Universalist preached to a chance audience, and, at its close, offered to preach again at a future day; when an old Friend arose, and said, If thou hast told the truth this time, we do not need thee any more; and, if thou hast told us a lie, we do not want thee any more.

The gospel according to Paul

To exercise candour and forbearance towards those who differ from us, is a Christian duty. Yet there are bounds beyond which candour is indifference, and forbearance treason. In things nonessential various opinions may be tolerated; in essentials we must be firm and unwavering. St. Paul sees that in Galatia the very foundations of Christianity are shaking. He therefore reasserts with great force the gospel he had preached there.

I. What was the gospel Paul preached? The great doctrine he insisted on, was justification by faith without the works of the law. Now consider–

1. His line of argument. The law curses and condemns. By faith alone are we justified, and made partakers of the benefits of the gospel. The prophets preached this. The covenant with Abraham was one of promise.

2. The objections he anticipates. No ground for saying the gospel tends to licentiousness. Works are needful, though not to be taken into account.

3. The perversions of which he complains. The addition of legal observance to performance of duties enjoined by the gospel, under the impression that thus they could render themselves more acceptable to God. This was mongrel–neither law nor gospel; so practically a rejection of the gospel.

II. Why did Paul manifest such zeal in maintaining, this gospel?

1. To maintain the purity of the gospel, the fountain of life to the world.

2. To maintain the importance of the gospel, the only source of salvation.

3. To maintain the sufficiency of the gospel to justify and sanctify.

Application–If this gospel be true, it is of importance

(a) to be received by you, and

(b) to be diffused by you over the world. There was nothing that Paul would not do and suffer, in order to propagate the gospel of God. Shall not we emulate his zeal? (Charles Simeon, M. A.)

The else gospel

The gospel must be preached in its

(1) oneness;

(2) fulness;

(3) symmetry;

(4) purity;

(5) sufficiency. (W. Cadman, M. A.)

Only one gospel

Strong words; to many, offensive words. The doctrine of only one gospel is not popular. Men are impatient of dogma, opposed to all exclusiveness in religion; they like to think there are many gospels, many avenues leading to salvation. The question, however, is, not whether the doctrine of only one gospel is popular, but whether it is true. There are various considerations which serve to prove its truth.

I. The nature and condition of man. The nature of man is one Varying greatly in outward form and expression, but still essentially one. And as his nature is one, so is the moral disease under which it labours. Sin, although manifold in its modes of action, is essentially one in principle, it is the assertion of independence, rebellion against Gods authority, the setting up of the human will in opposition to the Divine; and being thus one and the same disease, one and only one remedy is required to heal it.

II. The nature and character of god. Oneness His essential attribute, and we should expect a manifestation of that quality in any scheme for the salvation of man emanating from God.

III. The express teaching of the Word of God. One, and only one, plan of salvation is revealed in the Bible (Act 4:12).

1. The terms of the one salvation are broad, in that they propose to us the entire Person and work of Christ as the basis upon which we may build.

2. They are narrow, in that they rigorously exclude every other scheme and means of salvation. It is really a question of supremacy. One must reign, either God or man. In claiming supremacy, God claims His right; man must submit, or perish. (Emilius Bayley, B. D.)

The complete gospel

The apostle obviously means to state, not only that his gospel was true, but complete–nothing needed to be added to it. The Jewish teachers might have said: We do not contradict, we only modify, add to, and so improve the gospel as preached by Paul. The grand subject of the gospel of Christ is the way in which a sinner may be restored to the Divine favour, and obtain the pardon of his sin and the salvation of his soul. It is because the gospel of Christ contains the only true account of the only way of justification, and that a way exactly suited to our wretched circumstances, that it receives its name of gospel–glad tidings of great joy. Another gospel means, then, a system of doctrine teaching a way of obtaining the Divine favour different from that laid down in Christs gospel. The leading principles of Christs gospel are two:

(a) that men are restored to the Divine favour entirely on account of the doings and sufferings of Jesus Christ; and

(b) that men are interested in these doings and sufferings entirely by believing.

Every plan of restoring men to Gods favour, which does not embrace these two principles, or which embraces what is inconsistent with either of them, is another gospel. Every plan, for example, which, like that of the Judaising teachers, leads men to depend on their own obedience to any law to any extent; in any degree, either as the ground of their justification or the means of their justification, is another gospel. It is a most momentous consideration, that the avowed atheist does not more effectually reject the record of God concerning His Son, than the nominal Christian who believes something else than this under the name of a gospel, and trusts in some other Christ than this Christ under the name of a Saviour. (John Brown, D. D.)

Religious teaching to be tested by the Bible

Too much to blame are our over-credulous multitude, who, hand over head, admit and receive for orthodox whatsoever is propounded unto them by their teachers; and think this a sufficient warrant for any point they hold. Our ministers said it, or such a preacher delivered it in a pulpit,–as if there were not some who run before they are sent, and publish the visions of their own brain, prophesying that which God never spake. In matters civil we are more cautious and wary; no gold, almost, do we take before we have tried it by the touch, or weighed it in the balance; and what is the reason? because there is much of it light and naught; yea, hardly we will take a groat without bowing, bending, rubbing it, and the like, being therein oftentimes over-curious; but in religious matters, which concern our faith and souls salvation, we are over-careless, albeit we are forewarned of many false prophets that are gone into the world, and therefore willed not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits whether they be of God. This is a great yet common fault among us. Were he an angel from heaven that preaches to thee, yet art thou bound to look into his doctrine, and examine it, and not to take it upon credit without he bring sufficient proof and warrant for it. Like good Bereans, see you search the Scriptures, whether these things be so. (N. Rogers.)

Preaching

I. It seems to have been ordered by Divine wisdom that the gospel should, as much as possible, avail itself of the ordinary channels of communication and influence in spreading through the world.

II. the secret of the power of preaching.

1. It conveys far better than any other vehicle the affirmation of the whole man–his whole nature, his whole experience–to the matter which he desires to communicate.

2. It brings into play all the affinities, sympathies, and affections of the being, and is therefore a most powerful instrument in arriving at the truth.

3. So much is true of all preaching. But in the preaching of the gospel there is a source of special power–the principle of representation–the power and right to Speak to men in the name of God.

III. The special preaching of the apostolic age. (J. Baldwin Brown, B. A.)

Change of gospel

King James II. sat for his portrait to Verelst, the great flower painter. So completely was the canvas filled with elegant garlands of flowers, that the king himself was quite hidden out of sight. May we not in preaching and teaching attract so much attention to human wisdom, words and flowers, that Christ shall take quite an unimportant part in our instruction? And what is that but bringing in a different gospel, which yet is not another? The true gospel:—

I. The true gospel exists. Paul got his assurance of this–

1. By the manner in which it came to him.

(1) Not by intuition, learning, or traditions,

(2) but by direct revelation from heaven (Act 26:14-27).

2. By its revolutionary influence over him.

II. The true gospel is pervertible. It was perverted.

1. In apostolic times (see almost all the Epistles), which exposes the folly of going to antiquity for a standard in theology or morals.

2. In modern times, by rationalism, sectarianism, and intolerance.

III. The perversion of the true gospel is a tremendous evil; greater than the anathema of angels or apostles. Why? Because–

1. It misrepresents the Divine character.

2. Neutralizes the Divine power to save.

Conclusion:

1. A lesson to preachers. How great their responsibility.

2. A lesson to hearers. Take heed how ye hear. (D. Thomas.)

The intolerance of the gospel

I. The nature of the gospel shows it to be uncompromising.

1. It is founded on the Divine unity, and can never make a truce with Polytheism, Pantheism, or Materialism.

2. It displays the atonement of Christ, and consequently antagonizes every system which places salvation in any other.

3. It is revealed by one Spirit through inspired men, and therefore opposes

(1) rationalism,

(2) priestcraft.

II. This intolerance is adapted to the needs of the human mind.

1. The heart craves for one allsufficient Redeemer.

2. The intellect, for an infallible revelation of Divine love.

3. The moral nature, for an authoritative lawgiver in the midst of the tangled perplexities of life.

III. This intolerance is compatible with diversity in the manifestations of spiritual life. (S. Pearson, M. A.)

An angelic evangel

I. Its advantages and disadvantages.

1. It would carry a weight and conviction which no human ministry can impart.

2. But

(1) then our probation would be at an end, for there would be no choice between believing and disbelieving.

(2) We should lose the equality and sympathy between preacher and hearer based on a common nature and experience.

II. Its criterion. Supposing such to be possible, how are we to test its truth?

1. Not by the rank, genius, and holiness of the preacher.

2. But by comparing it with revealed truth. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The anathema

The most dreaded Jewish punishment. Three degrees.

I. Nidui. Casting out of the synagogue and separation from society, which might last thirty days.

II. Cherem. The sentence of devotion to death.

III. Shammatha or Maranatha, which purported that the criminal had nothing to expect but the final infliction of the Day of Judgment. He was loaded with execrations, excluded from temple and synagogue, his goods were confiscated, his sons debarred from circumcision and his daughters from marriage, and he solemnly remitted to the judgment of heaven. This was the curse the apostle invoked on himself or any one who preached another gospel. (D. Thomas.)

The old gospel and the new

Plenty of people come to a mission to hear a new gospel. I have seen the old gospel do many wonderful things. I have seen it transform character. I have seen it raise men from the lowest dregs of society and make them earnest and useful members of it. But I have never seen a new gospel do anything for any man. (W. H. M. H. Aitken.)

Christ the preachers great theme

There was a shield in which the maker wrought his name, so that it could be effaced only by the destruction of his work; and so should the name of our glorious Immanuel be inwrought through the texture of our instructions, that their very consistency shall be dependent on the diffusion of that one blessed name throughout their length and breadth. On entering the cathedral-towns of England, the towers, or the spire, of the mother-church, or minster, are seen shooting up into the sky, far above all the other buildings, public or private, secular or sacred, and so let Jesus, the Churchs Lord, King, and Saviour, have the pre-eminence above the whole city of topics and themes, Divine and human, which may be meetly grouped around His name; He casting His sanctifying shadow over all. (Evangelical Magazine.)

The desert of traitors

Benedict Arnold once asked a loyal captain what the Americans would do with him if they caught him. He replied, I believe they would first cut off your lame leg, which was wounded in the cause of freedom and virtue at Quebec, and bury it with the honours of war, and afterwards hang the remainder of your body on a gibbet. (Foster.)

The anathema

What did the apostle mean by this strong asseveration? They are scathing words, and if true for his time, are true for ours also. What could he mean but this, that if any misunderstood and misrepresented the gospel–Gods grandest and simplest revelation of Himself–it would show such a perverted mind, heart, and conscience, that he could be no other than accursed. He might conceivably be an angel coming from the undenied splendours of heaven; and if he failed to see Gods glory in Bethlehem, or could not feel Gods love at Calvary, or could not behold Divine hope for man at the resurrection, then, though his mind was angelic in its powers, it would be darker than the midnight sky, when the clouds return after the rain. Such moral gloom has fallen on many men; such callousness to the Cross; such indifference to the splendours of the Ascension; such utter scepticism about the completeness of Christs work, and the Divinity of Christs person. And if they have thus wilfully rejected the revelation of the first century, if they are not moved by love to a living Christ, God is their judge, and the gospel itself has become their accuser. In such a case this inspired sentence is a warning sent beforehand, that they may, shaking off their delusion, find blessing and life for evermore. (S. Pearson, M. A.)

A curse upon him who preaches a false doctrine

1. A fearfully earnest utterance.

2. Yet pressingly needful.

3. Instructive for all who are wavering. (J. P. Lange, D. D.)

The curse of the apostle against the false apostles

I. Whom it strikes.

1. Necessarily every one, without exception, who changes the blessing of the gospel into mischief, and so out of good prepares for himself death.

2. Those also who have deep insight, or other high qualifications for serving the kingdom of God, and yet do nut preach it purely.

3. Even an angel himself, if he could preach another gospel.

II. Why must it be uttered.

1. He who preaches the gospel must have a will to serve, not men, but God.

2. Through a false gospel men may indeed be attracted, but God views it as blasphemy.

3. Therefore he is placed under the curse, who will serve the gospel, and yet doing so as a man-pleaser, is found an unfruitful servant of Christ. (Lisco.)

St. Pauls curse on teachers of false doctrine

How weak is that reason which would argue from the holiness of a teacher to the truth of what is taught. It must never be taken for granted that the doctrine is sound, because the preacher seems righteous. There are certain standards to which doctrines must be referred, and by their agreement with these–not by the character of their supporters–are we bound to decide upon their truth or falseness.

I. Revelation must in all its parts be consistent with itself. Fresh disclosures of His will God may make from time to time, but they must always be in harmony with what has gone before. In reading the Bible we always look, as it were, on the same landscape; the only difference being, as we take in more of its statements, that more and more of the mist is rolled away from the horizon, so that the eye can include a broader sweep of beauty. The later writers turn towards us a larger portion of the illuminated hemisphere than the earlier; but as the mighty globe turns majestically on its axis, we feel that the oceans and lands which come successively into view, are but constituent parts of the same glorious world. There is the discovery of now territories, but as fast as discovered the territories combine to make up one planet. In like manner, it is no fresh system of religion, which is made known to succeeding generations of men, as the brief notices given to patriarchs expand in the institutions of the law, under the teachings of prophecy, till at length in the days of Christ and His apostles they burst into magnificence and fill a world with redemption. From beginning to end it is the same system–a system for the rescue of men through the interference of a Surety; and revelation has been only the gradual development of this system–the drawing up another fold of the veil from the landscape, the adding another stripe of light to the crescent; so that the early fathers of the race, and ourselves, on whom have fallen the ends of the world, look on the same arrangements for human deliverance, though to them there was nothing but a cloudy expanse, with here and there a prominent landmark, while to us, though the horizon loses itself in the far-off eternity, every object of personal interest is exhibited in beauty and distinctness. Nothing, therefore, is to be believed, which contradicts any portion of what is thus revealed. No matter what other credentials a teacher brings, if there be not this evidence in his favour his doctrine is to be rejected.

II. How are men to know that propounded doctrines are not according to truth? Evidently by comparison.

1. The duty of determining why you believe. The hope of believers is in no sense a baseless or indefinite thing, but rests upon grounds capable of demonstration. It is of paramount importance that you know thoroughly the claims of that gospel which is to expel every other.

2. The duty of examining what you believe. God has furnished the Christian with a rule by which to try doctrines, and commanded him to reject, without regard to the authority of the teacher, whatever that rule determines to be error.

3. The duty of thorough acquaintance with the Scriptures. What can be the worth of your decision, if you know but little of the criterion? (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Let him be accursed.–The sentence on false teachers

The Greek word is anathema, which properly means a person or thing which has been devoted to God; and especially something which he who devoted it has solemnly pledged himself to God to destroy (Lev 27:28-29; Num 21:2-3; Joh 6:16-17; Joh 6:21). But it is also used without any reference to an offerer or to a vow, and signifies a person or thing which is accursed (Deu 7:26). What did St. Paul mean by the expression, let him be accursed, as applied to the false teachers? He cannot mean that he would have them wish for the curse of God to come down on them. He would rather have prayed that these unhappy men might be converted and saved; as he himself, once a persecutor and blasphemer, and as the Galatians, once gross and wicked idolaters, had been. His meaning appears to be simply this, let him be regarded by you as one accursed of God. There is only one other place in which we find this expression in this exact form, viz., 1Co 16:22 –If any man love not the Lord, let him be anathema, maranatha. Can we imagine that Paul wished all professing Christians who did not love the Lord to be accursed? It is impossible to suppose such a thing. He can only mean, surely, that if any one proved that he had no real love for Christ, then–whatever his profession and his knowledge and his gifts might be–the Corinthians were to regard him as an unconverted man, and therefore as one who had no personal interest in the salvation of Christ, but was still under the curse of the law. And if this be his meaning, then there will be nothing in it but what will be in perfect harmony with all Pauls teaching and with all Pauls love for souls. (John Venn, M. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 8. But though we, or an angel] That Gospel which I have already preached to you is the only true Gospel; were I to preach any other, I should incur the curse of God. If your false teachers pretend, as many in early times did, that they received their accounts by the ministry of an angel, let them be accursed; separate them from your company, and have no religious communion with them. Leave them to that God who will show his displeasure against all who corrupt, all who add to, and all who take from the word of his revelation.

Let all those who, from the fickleness of their own minds, are ready to favour the reveries of every pretended prophet and prophetess who starts up, consider the awful words of the apostle. As, in the law, the receiver of stolen goods is as bad as the thief; so the encouragers of such pretended revelations are as bad, in the sight of God, as those impostors themselves. What says the word of God to them? Let them be accursed. Reader, lay these things to heart.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The apostle, by this vehement expression, doth no more suppose it possible that a heavenly angel should publish to them any other way of salvation than what he had published, than that he himself might so contradict his own doctrine. He only by it declares his certainty of the truth, which he had delivered to them; it was not to be contradicted either by man or angel; and further teacheth us, that additions to the doctrines of the gospel make another gospel; God neither allowing us to add to, nor to diminish from, Divine revelations; for of this nature were the corruptions crept into this church. These seducers owned Christ and the doctrine of the gospel: only teaching the Jewish circumcision, and other ceremonial rites, as necessary to be observed in order to peoples salvation, they made the pretended gospel (which they taught) to be another gospel than that which Paul had preached, and which believers in this church had received. In saying let him be accursed, he also saith that he who doth this shall be accursed; for the apostle would neither himself curse, nor direct others to curse, whom he did not know the Lord would curse, and look upon as cursed. These two verses look dreadfully upon the papacy, where many doctrines are published, and necessary to be received, which Paul never preached, nor are to be found in any part of Divine writ.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

8. Buthowever weighty theymay seem “who trouble you.” Translate as Greek,“Even though we,” namely, I and the brethren with me,weighty and many as we are (Gal 1:1;Gal 1:2). The Greekimplies a case supposed which never has occurred.

angelin which light yeat first received me (compare Gal 4:14;1Co 13:1), and whose authority isthe highest possible next to that of God and Christ. A newrevelation, even though seemingly accredited by miracles, is not tobe received if it contradict the already existing revelation. For Godcannot contradict Himself (Deu 13:1-3;1Ki 13:18; Mat 24:24;2Th 2:9). The Judaizing teacherssheltered themselves under the names of the great apostles, James,John, and Peter: “Do not bring these names up to me, for even ifan angel,” &c. Not that he means, the apostles reallysupported the Judaizers: but he wishes to show, when the truth is inquestion, respect of persons is inadmissible [CHRYSOSTOM].

preachthat is, “shouldpreach.”

any other gospel . . .thanThe Greek expresses not so much “any othergospel different from what we have preached,” as, “anygospel BESIDE that whichwe preached.” This distinctly opposes the traditions of theChurch of Rome, which are at once besides and against(the Greek includes both ideas) the written Word, our only”attested rule.”

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

But though we, or an angel from heaven,…. The apostle, in order to assert the more strongly the truth, purity, and perfection of the Gospel, as preached by him; and to deter persons from preaching another Gospel, and others from receiving it, supposes a case impossible; and, in such a case, denounces his anathemas. It was not possible, that he, or any of his fellow apostles, who had been so clearly led and so fully established in the Gospel of Christ, and of which they had had such a powerful and comfortable experience in their souls, could ever preach one different from it; nor was it possible that a good angel, one that is in heaven, that always beholds the face of God there, is ever ready to do his will, as he never could be employed by God in publishing another, so he never would; and yet, was it possible or such a thing to be done by such men, or such an angel, he or they would deserve the curse of God and men; their having the highest names, or being of the highest character, and in the highest office and class of beings, would not screen them; and therefore how should the false apostles, and those who followed them, ever think to escape, since even these would not, should they

preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you; that is, not only anyone that is contrary to it, but any one besides it; for such was the perfection of the Gospel, as preached by the apostle, who declared the whole counsel of God, and kept back nothing that was profitable to the churches, that no addition could, or might be made unto it:

let him be accursed, or “anathema”; see 1Co 16:22 which may respect his excommunication out of the church, and his sentence of condemnation by Christ at the last day; and the sense be this, let him be ejected from the ministry of the word, degraded from his office, and cast out of the church; let him be no more a minister, nor a member of it; and let him be abhorred of men, and accursed of Christ; let him hear the awful sentence, “go ye accursed”, &c.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

If we ( ). Condition of third class ( and aorist middle subjunctive ). Suppose I (literary plural) should turn renegade and preach “other than” (‘ ), “contrary to that which we preached.” Preachers have turned away from Christ, alas, and preached “humanism” or some other new-fangled notion. The Jews termed Paul a renegade for leaving Judaism for Christianity. But it was before Paul had seen Christ that he clung to the law. Paul is dogmatic and positive here, for he knows that he is standing upon solid ground, the fact of Christ dying for us and rising again. He had seen the Risen Jesus Christ. No angel can change Paul now.

Let him be anathema ( ). See on 1Co 12:3 for this word.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

We. See on 1Th 1:2.

Angel from heaven [ ] . The phrase only here.

“Angels in heaven or the heavens,” Mt 22:30; Mr 12:25; Mr 13:32. “Angels of the heavens,” Mt 24:36.

Other than that [ ] . Roman Catholic interpreters insist that par’ should be rendered contrary to, though the Vulg. gives praeterquam besides. Some Protestant interpreters insist on besides as being against supplementing the gospel with traditions. The explanation is found in the previous words, a different gospel. Any gospel which is different from the one gospel, is both beside and contrary to.

Accursed [] . See on Rom 9:3, and offerings, Luk 21:5. Comp. katara, curse and ejpikataratov cursed, Gal 3:13. In LXX always curse, except Lev 27:28, and the apocryphal books, where it is always gift or offering. By Paul always curse : see Rom 9:3; 1Co 12:3; 1Co 16:22. The sense of excommunication, introduces by patristic writers, does not appear in New Testament.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “But though we,” (alla kai ean hemeis) “But even if we; to concede any might err from the truth Paul includes himself and his missionary colleagues in the hypothetical “we”.

2) “Or an angel from heaven,” (e angelos eks ouranos) “or an angel out of (come from) heaven,” for even angels (fallen angels) still lie to men, 1Ki 13:18; Spirits are to be tested, by the Word, whether they be in harmony with the Word of God, 1Jn 4:1.

3) “Preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,” (euangelisetai (humin) par’ ho euangelisametha humin) “should preach a gospel (to you all) beside (different in kind from) what we preached to you all,” Deu 12:32; Jos 1:7; Pro 30:7.

4) “Let him be accursed,” (anathema esto) “Let him be (as) a curse,” or accursed; Avoid him like a leper or contagious disease, have no close contact with him, 1Co 16:22; Deu 4:2; Rev 22:18-19.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

8. But though we. As he proceeds in defending the authority of his doctrine, his confidence swells. First of all, he declares that the doctrine which he had preached is the only gospel, and that the attempt to set it aside is highly criminal. But then he was aware, the false apostles might object: “We will not yield to you in our desire to maintain the gospel, or in those feelings of respect for it which we are accustomed to cherish.” Just as, at the present day, the Papists describe in the strongest terms the sacredness with which they regard the gospel, and kiss the very name with the deepest reverence, and yet, when brought to the trial, are found to persecute fiercely the pure and simple doctrine of the gospel. Accordingly, Paul does not rest satisfied with this general declaration, but proceeds to define what the gospel is, and what it contains, and declares boldly that his doctrine is the true gospel; so as to resist all further inquiry.

Of what avail was it to profess respect for the gospel, and not to know what it meant? With Papists, who hold themselves bound to render implicit faith, that might be perfectly sufficient; but with Christians, where there is no knowledge, there is no faith. That the Galatians, who were otherwise disposed to obey the gospel, might not wander hither and thither, and “find no rest for the sole of their foot,” (Gen 8:9,) Paul enjoins them to stand steadfastly by his doctrine. He demands such unhesitating belief of his preaching, that he pronounces a curse on all who dared to contradict it.

And here it is not a little remarkable, that he begins with himself; for thus he anticipates a slander with which his enemies would have loaded him. “You wish to have everything which comes from you received without hesitation, because it is your own.” To show that there is no foundation for such a statement, he instantly surrenders the right of advancing anything against his own doctrine. He claims no superiority, in this respect, over other men, but justly demands from all, equally with himself, subjection to the word of God.

Or an angel from heaven. In order to destroy more completely the pretensions of the false apostles, he rises so high as to speak of angels; and, on the supposition that they taught a different doctrine, he does not satisfy himself with saying that they were not entitled to be heard, but declares that they ought to be held accursed. Some may think, that it was absurd to engage in a controversy with angels about his doctrine; but a just view of the whole matter will enable any one to perceive, that this part of the apostle’s proceedings was proper and necessary. It is impossible, no doubt, for angels from heaven to teach anything else than the certain truth of God. But when the credit due to doctrines which God had revealed concerning the salvation of men was the subject of controversy, he did not reckon it enough to disclaim the judgment of men, without declining, at the same time, the authority of angels.

And thus, when he pronounces a curse on angels who should teach any other doctrine (21) though his argument is derived from an impossibility, it is not superfluous. This exaggerated language must, have contributed greatly to strengthen the confidence in Paul’s preaching. His opponents, by employing the lofty titles of men, attempted to press hard on him and on his doctrine. He meets them by the bold assertion, that even angels are unable to shake his authority. This is no disparagement to angels. To promote the glory of God by every possible means was the design of their creation. He who endeavors, in a pious manner, to accomplish this object, by an apparently desrespectful mention of their name, detracts nothing from their high rank. This language not only exhibits, in an impressive manner, the majesty of the word of God, but yields, also, a powerful confirmation to our faith while, in reliance on that word, we feel ourselves at liberty to treat even angels with defiance and scorn. When he says, “let him be accursed,” the meaning must be, “let him be held by you as accursed.” In expounding 1Co 12:3, we had occasion to speak of the word ἀνάθεμα. (22). Here it denotes cursing, and answers to the Hebrew word, הרם (hherem.)

(21) “ Quand il denonce les anges pour excommuniez et pour abominables, s’ils enseignent autre chose.” “When he denounces the angels as excommunicated and detestable persons, if they teach anything else.”

(22) “ ᾿Ανάθεμα. This word, which we render accursed, doth not signify ‘accursed or condemned of God to the punishments of another world.’ This the Apostle would not wish to the worst of men. The meaning is, ‘Let him be as a person excommunicated, or wholly cut off from the synagogue, or church, with whom it is unlawful to have any commerce or correspondence whatever.’ And so it is not properly a wish of the apostle, but a direction to the Galatians how to behave, Let him be ἀνάθεμα. ‘Hold him, and treat him as an excommunicated and accursed person.’” — Chandler.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(8) Though.The Greek is, strictly, even though, marking an extreme and improbable supposition.

We.It seems, perhaps, too much to say, in the face of 2Th. 2:2 (by letter as from us), that St. Paul never used the plural in speaking of himself alone. Still there may, both there and here, be some thought of associating his more immediate companions (the brethren which are with me, Gal. 1:2) with himself, the more so as he knew them to be entirely at one with him in doctrine.

Than that.The Greek has here, not a conjunction, but a preposition, the precise sense of which is ambiguous. It may mean besides, in addition, or it may mean contrary to. The first of these senses has met with the most favour from Protestant, the second from Roman Catholic commentators, as, on the one hand, it seemed to exclude, and on the other to admit, the appeal to tradition. Looking at it strictly in connection with the context, the sense contrary seems best, because the gospel taught by the Judaising teachers was another, in the sense of being different from that of St. Paul. It was a fundamental opposition of principles, not merely the addition of certain new doctrines to the old.

Accursed.See 1Co. 16:22. The original Greek word is retained in the translation, Let him be Anathema. The word exists in two forms, with a long e and a short e respectively; and whereas its original meaning was simply that of being devoted to God, the form with the long vowel came by gradual usage to be reserved for the good side of this: devoted, in the sense of consecration; while the form with the short vowel was in like manner reserved for the bad sense: devoted to the curse of God. Attempts have been made to weaken its significance in this passage by restricting it to ex-communication by the Church; but this, though a later ecclesiastical use of the word, was not current at such an early date.

In considering the dogmatic application, it is right to bear in mind the nature of the heretical doctrines which it was the Apostles object to denounce. They made no profession to be deduced from his own, but were in radical and avowed opposition to them. Still, there is room to believe that if the Apostle could have reviewed his own words at a calmer moment he might have said of himself: I spake as a man.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

8. Though an angel This is possible only as an angel from heaven is a free agent, and able, like the first angels, to forsake God. Paul had heard his gospel from Christ himself, and he felt his assurance greater even than the counter testimony of an angel from heaven. Christ’s gospel is superior to an angel’s anti-gospel. The gospel, like Christ himself, is superior to all finite worth. Should some angelic form appear at Ancyra, and say that the gospel is false, there is a delusion about it.

And so in modern days, a false demonism is abroad ignoring Christ, or demanding to transform his gospel. It can bring nothing greater than Christ; nothing truer, holier, more saving than his gospel. Let them be anathema so far as they abjure the Lord Jesus. Chrysostom finely suggests that Paul is here sweepingly answering those who were quoting Peter and James against him. Speak you of apostles? I tell you if an angel contradict the gospel he is to be rejected!

Accursed An anathema, devoted to destruction. This is the New Testament sense; the later Church sense is excommunicated, severed from true believers. In such sense it is used in the old creeds as condemning the rejecters of each given article.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any Gospel other than that which you received, let him be anathema.’

Did they not remember that they had received the Gospel with powerful evidence of the working of the Spirit (Gal 3:2)? Thus anyone, whether man or supernatural being, who sought to turn them from what they had received to anything else, was worthy only to be ‘cursed’ (anathema), that is, devoted to the judgment of God. The words stress the strong feeling that Paul has about the matter. It is not his own teaching that they are deserting, he warns them, it is the work of the Spirit of God. And it is so important that he repeats his powerful words again.

An ‘anathema’ was something that was declared against the worst of sinners, those who had ‘sinned with a high hand’. And these men were guilty of the greatest sin of all, taking men’s eyes off Christ, God’s beloved Son.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Gal 1:8. Though we, or an angel from heaven, Some have imagined, that the Apostle uses this expression as a prophetical prevention against crediting the pretences of Cerinthus and Mahomet, who both pretended to have received their revelations by the ministry of an angel.It may likewise glance at the manner of giving the law, which, according to the Apostle, was by the ministration of angels. By preaching any other Gospel, he means the preaching any thing as Gospel besides what he had preached.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Gal 1:8 . , not but , as an antithesis to (Hofmann), which has already been fully disposed of by . . . It is rather the however confronting most emphatically the . . . “There are some, etc.; whoso, however, it may be who so behaves, let him he accursed! ” This curse pronounced by the apostle on his opponents is indirect , but, because it is brought about by a conclusion a majori ad minus , all the more emphatic .

] to be taken together, even in the case that . See Herm. ad Viger . p. 832; Hartung, Partikell . I. p. 140 f.

] applies primarily and chiefly to the apostle himself, but the (Gal 1:2 ) are also included. To embrace in the reference the associates of the apostle in founding the Galatian churches (Hofmann) is premature, for these are only presented to the reader in the which follows.

] to be taken together: an angel (Hom. Il . xi. 184). Comp. , Mat 22:30 . If Paul rejects both his own and angelic authority consequently even the supposed superhuman intervention (comp. 1Co 13:1 ) with reference to the case assumed, as accursed, [20] every one without exception (comp. , Gal 5:10 ) is in the same case subject to the same curse. The certainty, that no other gospel but that preached by the apostle to his readers was the true one, cannot be more decisively confirmed.

. ] This , which is not to be explained by (Schott, Flatt, Hofmann), is simply that which , namely, as the context shows, as contents of the gospel; “beyond that which we,” etc. (Bernhardy, p. 259.) This may mean either praeterquam (Vulgate, Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Erasmus, Beza, Calovius, Rambach, and others) or contra (so Theodoret and the older Catholics, Grotius, and many others; also Winer, Rckert, Usteri, Matthies, Schott, Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette, Wieseler, Hofmann). For the two meanings, see Matthiae, p. 1381; Winer, p. 377 [E. T. 503]. In earlier times a dogmatic interest was involved in this point: the Lutherans, in order to combat tradition, laying the stress on praeterquam ; and the Catholics, to protect the same, on contra . See Calovius and Estius. The contra , or more exactly, the sense of specific difference , is most suitable to the context (see Gal 1:6 , .). Comp. Rom 16:17 .

] that is, “I and my companions at the time of your conversion” (comp. , Gal 1:9 ). The emphasis, however, lies on .

.] Let him be subject to the divine wrath and everlasting perdition ( ), the same as and , Gal 3:13 ; see on Rom 9:3 . The opposite, Gal 6:16 . To apply it (Rosenmller, Baumgarten-Crusius, comp. also Grotius and Semler) to the idea of excommunication subsequently expressed in the church (Suicer, Thes . I. p. 270) by the word , is contrary to the usage of the N.T. (Rom 9:3 ; 1Co 12:3 ; 1Co 16:22 ), and is besides in this passage erroneous, because even a false-teaching angel is supposed in the protasis. Comp., on the contrary, Gal 5:10 , ; 2Th 1:9 . See generally the thoroughly excellent discussion of Wieseler, p. 39 ff. Mark, moreover, in the use of the preceptive rather than the mere optative form, the expression of the apostolic , Let him be!

[20] Comp. Ignatius, ad Smyrn . 6, where it is said even of the angels , , .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 2050
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE

Gal 1:8-9. Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other Gospel unto you, than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

TO exercise candour and forbearance towards those who differ from us, is the duty of all: yet there are bounds beyond which candour becomes indifference, and forbearance treason. In things which are nonessential, and only of secondary importance, we should on no account be rigid: we should form our own opinions, and leave others to follow their own judgment: yea, rather than grieve them by an unnecessary adherence to our own ways, we should conform to theirs, or at least forbear to prosecute our own. This was the conduct of the Apostle Paul. He bore with the infirmities of his weak brethren [Note: Rom 14:1; Rom 15:1.]: he circumcised Timothy, in order that he might gain an easier access to them for their good [Note: Act 16:3.]. He became all things to all men, that he might win their souls [Note: 1Co 9:19-22.]: and rather than prove a stumbling-block to any, by using that liberty to which he was introduced by the Gospel, he would decline the use of meat to the latest hour of his life [Note: 1Co 8:13.]. But was this his practice when he came to things essential? Did he express no concern when he saw the whole city of Athens given to idolatry? Yes; his spirit was stirred within him, and he testified boldly against their ignorant superstitions [Note: Act 17:16; Act 17:22.]. When he perceived that some of the Corinthians were lax in their sentiments and conduct, he told them plainly, that if any man defiled the temple of God, him would God destroy [Note: 1Co 3:17.]. Thus, in the passage before us, he, who on other occasions was gentle among them, even like a nursing mother cherishing her children [Note: 1Th 2:7.], was filled with indignation against those who perverted the Gospel of Christ, and denounced against every one of them, even though he were an angel from heaven, the most awful anathemas: yea, that they might know the fixedness of his mind respecting it, he renewed his declarations, and repeated his anathemas.

Let us then inquire,

I.

What was the Gospel which Paul preached

On this point the utmost caution is necessary. The Apostle pronounces every one accursed that preaches any other Gospel different from that which he had preached to the Galatians. A mistake therefore in this matter will he absolutely fatal to us.
Observe then, that the great doctrine which he insisted on, was justification by faith alone without the works of the law. This, I say, was the point which he maintained, in contradistinction to justification by works, or by faith and works together: and this, namely, justification by faith without works, was the Gospel which he preached.

Respecting this we can have no doubt, if we consider,

1.

The statements which he makes

[Here let us notice his train of argument, especially in that part of the epistle which accords with a similar statement in the Epistle to the Romans. He observes, that Abraham was justified by faith; and that we become partakers of his benefits by faith also [Note: Gal 3:6-9.]: that the law, instead of justifying, curses and condemns us [Note: Gal 3:10.]: that the prophets asserted justification by faith, in direct opposition to justification by the works of the law [Note: Gal 3:11-12.]: and that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, not that we might afterwards be justified by the law, but that we might enjoy his blessings through faith [Note: Gal 3:13-14.]. The Apostle then goes on to illustrate and confirm this by the covenant which was made with Abraham. In this covenant God gave to Abraham, and to his believing posterity, the inheritance of eternal life. Four hundred and thirty years after, he gave the law to Moses, and made another covenant with the Jews respecting their possession of the earthly Canaan. This latter covenant therefore, you perceive, was made between different parties; the former being between God and Abraham, (including all the believing seed of Abraham, whether they were circumcised or not,) and the other, between God and the Jewish nation only: consequently, as a mans covenant cannot be annulled unless both parties consent, so the covenant which God made with the Jews cannot supersede that which he had so long before made with Abraham and his believing seed; because the latter party were not present at the making of it, nor had they ever consented to annul the covenant which had been made with them [Note: Gal 3:15-18.]. If it be asked, Why then was the law given? We answer, Not to supersede the covenant which had been before confirmed of God in Christ, but to shew men their need of that better covenant [Note: Gal 3:19.], and to serve as a school-master to bring them unto Christ, that they might be justified by faith [Note: Gal 3:24.].

Now compare this with the whole train of argument in the five first chapters to the Romans, and the coincidence will establish the point at once. The Apostle there shews our condemnation by the law, and the consequent impossibility of ever being justified by it: from thence he shews the necessity of seeking justification by faith in Christ [Note: Rom 3:19-22.]; more especially because that way of justification, and that alone, would exclude boasting [Note: Rom 3:27-28. (Mark ver. 28.)]. He then proceeds to establish his point by the examples of Abraham [Note: Rom 4:1-3.] and David [Note: Rom 4:6-8.], both of whom sought justification by faith only: and he argues from thence, that if works compose any part of our justifying righteousness, our reward will not be of grace, but of debt; and heaven will be, not a gift bestowed, but a compensation that we have earned: and consequently, that we must not work in order to obtain righteousness, but believe on him who justifieth the ungodly [Note: Rom 4:4-5. Mark these verses, and weigh every word in them.]: (Mark well, not the godly, but the ungodly.) If it be said, that another Apostle represents Abraham as justified by his works [Note: Jam 2:21.], St. Paul proves to demonstration, that St. James cannot speak of Abrahams justification before God, but only of the justification, or manifestation, of his faith, as true, and genuine; for that Abraham was justified while yet he was in uncircumcision [Note: Jam 4:9-11.]; which was not only before he offered Isaac upon the altar, but long before Isaac was born [Note: Gen 17:19; Gen 17:23-24, with Gen 22:1-13.].

It is needless to prosecute any further the Apostles statement: it will be sufficient just to mention his conclusion from it, which is; Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God [Note: Rom 5:1.].]

2.

The objections he anticipates

[In all his writings St. Paul is careful to obviate the objections which he foresees will be urged against the truths that he inculcates. The objections which he supposes an ignorant person will make, are two: first, That if, where sin has abounded, grace much more abounds, we may continue in sin that grace may abound [Note: Rom 5:20; Rom 6:1.]: for the greater sinners we are before we are justified, the more will the grace of God be magnified in justifying such ungodly creatures: and, if a person be justified without any respect to his works, then, secondly, we may live in sin after we are justified; because we are not under the law which requires good works, but under a dispensation of grace [Note: Rom 6:15.], wherein life is given freely without any regard to our works, past, present, or future.

Time will not admit of our considering how he answers these objections: (suffice it to say, that he shews they have no solid foundation; and that good works are effectually secured, though they be not taken into the account in our justification:) we mention the objections only, to shew what the doctrine must be that gave rise to them. Suppose the Apostle had said, that we were to be justified by our works alone, or by faith and works united, what room could there have been for such objections as these? If works were taken into consideration in the matter of our justification before God, we could have no temptation whatever on that account, to neglect them, either before or after we were justified. But if we are justified by faith without any respect to our works, then we can see at once, how a person, not understanding the whole of the Christian scheme, might conceive that the doctrine tended to licentiousness. Indeed these are the very objections that are yet daily urged by ignorant people against the Apostles doctrine: they cry, You need only believe, and you may live as you will: and the more wicked you are, the more will the free grace of God be glorified in saving you. Persons never think of urging these objections against those who preach salvation by works, whether in the whole or in part; which is a sure proof, that the Apostle did not preach that doctrine; but that the doctrine which he delivered was that of salvation by faith without the works of the law. In this view of his doctrine there is some apparent ground for the objection: in any other view of it, there is none at all.]

3.

The perversions he complains of

[What was it he complained of in the conduct of the Galatians? It was this: that they added the observance of the Mosaic ritual to the duties enjoined by the Gospel [Note: Gal 4:9-10.], hoping thereby to render themselves more acceptable to God. And in what manner does he complain of this? He calls it an introducing of another Gospel, which yet was not another [Note: Gal 1:6-7.] (for it was a mongrel religion, neither law nor Gospel); or, in other words, a perversion or rejection of the true Gospel [Note: Gal 1:6-7. with 3:1.]. Now what ground had he for such heavy accusations, if he himself preached salvation (whether in whole or in part) by the works of the law? On this supposition, the more works they did, the more certain they would be to obtain justification: supposing the Mosaic ritual to be abrogated, there still was no harm in observing days, and months, and years; and all that he could properly say to them on the occasion, was, That they were giving themselves needless trouble: he must have commended them for their zeal in doing these works; and only told them, that now there was no occasion for these observances. But if he preached justification by faith without the works of the law, and saw that they were performing these works in order to secure their justification, then he might well say, I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain [Note: Gal 4:11.].

AgainWe read of heavy complaints against Peter. What had Peter done? He had conversed familiarly with the Gentile converts, and lived for a season, as they did, without any regard to the Mosaic ritual. But when some Judaizing converts came from Jerusalem, he was afraid of offending their prejudices; and therefore he forsook the Gentile converts, and lived with the others in the observance of all the Jewish rites and ceremonies [Note: Gal 2:11-13.]. By this conduct, he not only sanctioned the erroneous idea that the Mosaic rites were still obligatory on the Jewish Christians, but that it was necessary even for the Gentile Christians to conform to them. Now this, in any view of St. Pauls doctrine, was highly blameworthy; because it was imposing a needless yoke upon the neck of the Gentiles. But this was all: and supposing that Paul had preached justification by works, this was all that he could properly lay to the charge of Peter. But supposing, as we have shewn, that the Gospel which Paul preached held forth justification by faith alone, then there was abundant reason for rebuking Peter in the presence of the whole Church, and accusing him of subverting the foundations of the Gospel [Note: Gal 2:14-16.], and declaring that, so far as he prevailed, he frustrated the grace of God, and made the death of Christ to be in vain [Note: Gal 2:21.].]

We are convinced that, if this accumulated evidence be duly weighed, no doubt can remain upon our minds respecting the doctrine which Paul preached, and which he calls in our text The Gospel. Let us then inquire,

II.

Why he manifested such zeal in maintaining it

No man had less of bigotry than the Apostle Paul: for, though a Jew, he spent his life in vindicating the liberty of the Gentiles, and, in fact, died a martyr to. their cause [Note: Act 21:28-31.]. Nor was he actuated by resentment; for, when most blaming the Galatians, he says, Ye have not injured me at all [Note: Gal 4:12.]. Nor was he impelled by ambition, as though he would preserve an unrivalled ascendency over the Galatian Church; for he considered himself as not having dominion over their faith, but merely as a helper of their joy [Note: 2Co 1:24.]. His view was to maintain,

1.

The purity of the Gospel

[The Gospel is a fountain of life to a ruined world: nor is there a cistern in the universe that can afford waters so salubrious. It is there alone that Christ is revealed: and there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we can be saved [Note: Act 4:12.]. Now a perverting of this fundamental doctrine of justification by faith alone, is a poisoning of that fountain; and consequently a destroying of the whole human race, as well those to whom its waters flow, as those who dwell in the parched desert. Suppose any man were found so in-human, as without any cause to poison the spring whereby a populous city were sustained, and from whence alone they could draw what was necessary for their sustenance; would not every living creature execrate him? Yet that man would be innocent in comparison of him who diffuses the deadly doctrines of a mutilated Gospel: for the former destroys only the bodies of men; whereas the latter consigns over their souls to everlasting destruction. No wonder then that the Apostle expressed himself with such vehemence! no wonder that he pronounced every person, whether it were himself, or an angel from heaven, accursed, who should dare to adulterate the sincere milk of the Word [Note: 2Co 2:17; 2Co 4:2.]! It was on this ground that he resisted with invincible firmness the attempts that were made to get Titus circumcised [Note: Gal 2:3.]; and it was with the same view that he opposed so strenuously all the efforts of Judaizing teachers, even though they were sanctioned by the examples of Barnabas or Peter himself.]

2.

The importance of the Gospel

[Many who would shudder at the idea of infidelity, are ready to consider the doctrine of justification by faith alone, either as erroneous, or at best as speculative, doubtful, and indifferent. They will not unfrequently say, Take care to do good works, and you need not trouble yourself about these nice questions. Now I readily grant that there are nice questions relative to predestination and election, and some other points, which may, or may not, be received consistently with our holding the Head, the Lord Jesus Christ: but this is not the case with the doctrine before us. Justification by faith alone, is the hinge upon which the whole of Christianity turns. If that be practically received into the heart, it will save a man, though he be mistaken in many other points: but a mistake relative to that will be fatal to him, though he should hold every other truth in the Bible. Hear how St. Paul speaks in a passage before referred to; If righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain [Note: Gal 2:21.]; that is, It was in vain that Christ came down from heaven: all that he did or suffered was in vain, if righteousness (whether in whole or in part) come by the law; for all that are under the law are under the curse [Note: Gal 3:10. compared with Gal 5:3.]. Again, with peculiar firmness and solemnity he says, Behold, I, Paul, say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing [Note: Gal 5:2.]. What! was there any sin in circumcision? Why then did Paul circumcise Timothy? No: the act was as innocent as any act could be: but the sin lay, in complying with that ordinance with a view to further their justification before God: and then, it not only did not improve the prospects of the person that submitted to it, but made Christ himself of no profit to him whatsoever. Once more he says, Christ is become of no effect unto you; whosoever of you is justified by the law, ye are fallen from grace [Note: Gal 5:4.]; that is, Ye have utterly renounced the grace of the Gospel, and ye can no more be saved, than the devils themselves; for Christ is become of no effect unto you. In the Epistle to the Romans he confirms these things, not merely, as in the fore-cited passages, by strong assertions, but by matter of fact: for he declares that the Jews were left to perish, notwithstanding all their endeavours to obtain righteousness by the law; and that the Gentiles, who had paid no attention whatever to righteousness of any kind, were saved: and that the reason of the one being saved, while the others perished, was, that the one embraced the doctrine of justification by faith only, while the others were too proud to submit to it [Note: Rom 9:30-33; Rom 10:3-4.]. Let these matters be considered; and then let any one say, whether there was not good reason for the Apostles anathemas, which under any other circumstances might have been justly counted harsh and severe. He felt the importance of the doctrine; and he wished all others to feel it: and therefore he did not hesitate to imprecate curses even on an angel from heaven, if any one could be found blind and impious enough to set it aside.]

3.

The sufficiency of the Gospel

[We are far from imputing any evil intention to those who object to the doctrine we are maintaining. They have a zeal for God; but not according to knowledge [Note: Rom 10:2.]. They have fears and apprehensions that the Gospel which has been set forth, is insufficient either to justify, or to sanctify, the soul: and on this account they add good works to faith in order to their justification; conceiving, that the righteousness of Christ cannot be the less effectual for the addition of ours to it; and that the idea of being justified in part by our good works must be an irresistible inducement to the performance of them: whereas the exalting of faith as the only mean of salvation, must, they suppose, relax mens diligence in good works. But let us not presume to prop up the ark, or to change the plans which Infinite Wisdom has devised for the salvation of man. The robe of Christs righteousness is quite sufficient to cover our nakedness [Note: Rev 3:18.], without adding to it the filthy rags of our righteousness [Note: Isa 64:6.]. And there are grounds enough for abounding in good works without putting them into the place of Christ, and making a Saviour of them. The Scripture is plain; All that believe are justified from all things [Note: Act 13:39.]: and it is equally plain, that faith will work by love [Note: Gal 5:6.], and overcome the world [Note: 1Jn 5:4.], and purify the heart [Note: Act 15:9.]. Had the Gospel needed any addition in either of these respects, St. Paul would not have been so adverse to the attempts to improve it: but, as it needed nothing of this kind, he could not endure that we should presume to be wiser than God: Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty, instruct him? He that reproveth God, let him answer it [Note: Job 40:2.].]

Our improvement of this subject must be short: but we cannot conclude it without briefly noticing its importance,
1.

To those who minister

[It is not within the compass of language to suggest words that could more deserve the attention of ministers, than those of our text. Many things doubtless are requisite for a due discharge of the ministry: but there is one that as far surpasses all others, as the sun exceeds a taper. It is this; an acquaintance with this fundamental doctrine of Scripture, the doctrine of justification by faith alone. If a man be not instructed in it, how can he instruct others? and if he be not instructing them in this, what is he doing, but bringing down curses upon his own soul, and leading his people also to destruction? Would to God, that those who look forward to the ministry as a source of worldly honour or emolument, would seriously reflect upon this tremendous passage, and consider, whether it be worth their while to involve themselves in such accumulated misery! Would to God that those also who are in the ministry, would consider what they have undertaken to preach, and what is uniformly inculcated in the articles, the homilies, and the liturgy of our Church! But whether men will consider for themselves or not, we must say, a necessity is laid upon them, and woe be unto them if they preach not the Gospel [Note: 1Co 9:16.].]

2.

To those who are ministered unto

[If there be such a necessity laid on ministers to preach the truth as it is in Jesus, there must be the same necessity for you to hear and embrace it. Inquire then, what is the Gospel that ye have received? Is it this, or is it another Gospel? Are your views of the Gospel such as would furnish occasion for an ignorant person to raise objections against it as tending to licentiousness? Yet do you, at the same time, manifest by your life and conversation, that it is a doctrine according to godliness? Inquire into these things; for they are your life [Note: Deu 32:47.]. If your views of Divine truth do not answer to this description, they are not such as the Apostle Paul had, nor will they lead you where he is. If, instead of looking for salvation by faith alone, you are mixing your own merits with those of Christ, you must inevitably perish: Christ shall profit you nothing. You may build hay, and wood, and stubble, upon the true foundation, and yet be saved at last: you will suffer loss indeed; yet you will be saved, though it be as persons snatched out of the fire [Note: 1Co 3:12; 1Co 3:15.]. But if you build on any thing besides Christ, you have a foundation of sand, which will fail you in the hour of trial, to the destruction of your whole fabric, and the ruin of your own souls [Note: Mat 7:26-27.]. The mixtures of your righteousness with Christs, like the feet of iron and clay in Nebuchadnezzars image, will never bear the super-incumbent weight: they cannot unite; they cannot adhere; if you attempt to stand upon them, you will fall and be broken in pieces [Note: Dan 2:33-34.]. There is but one faith [Note: Eph 4:5.], but one foundation: other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ [Note: 1Co 3:11.]. Take heed therefore that you build upon it [Note: 1Co 3:10.]; and let your superstructure be such as shall be approved in the day when it shall be tried by fire [Note: 1Co 3:13-14.].]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Ver. 8. Or an angel ] Not an evil angel (as Ambrose understands it), but a good angel, per impossibile, as Joh 8:55 .

Than that which we, &c. ] Or besides that which we have preached. He saith not, contrary to that, but besides that; for indeed that which is directly besides, is indirectly against the gospel.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

8 .] But (no matter who they are . &c.) even though (in , , &c., the force of the is distributed over the whole supposition following, see Hartung, Partikell. i. 139; and is distinguished from , in supposing a case which has never occurred, see 1Co 13:1 , and a full explanation in Herm. on Viger, p. 832) we (i.e. usually, ‘ I, Paul :’ but perhaps used here on account of , Gal 1:2 ) or an angel from heaven ( . . to be taken together, not . .: introduced here as the highest possible authority, next to a divine Person: even were this possible, were the highest rank of created beings to furnish the preacher, &c. See 1Co 13:1 . Perhaps also, as Chrys., there is a reference to the new teachers having sheltered themselves under the names of the great Apostles: , , . . . Then he adds: . , , , , , . , ), preach (evangelize: it is impossible to preserve in English the , and in it the reference back to Gal 1:6-7 ) to you other than what ( (reff.) as in , , , &c. not merely ‘ against ,’ nor merely ‘ besides ,’ but indicating ‘ beyond ,’ in the sense of overstepping the limit into a new region, i.e. it points out specific difference . The preposition is important here, as it has been pressed by Protestants in the sense of ‘ besides ,’ against Roman Catholic tradition, and in consequence maintained by the latter in the sense of ‘ against .’ It in fact includes both) we preached (evangelized) to you, let him be accursed ( of God : no reference to ecclesiastical excommunication: for an angel is here included. See note, Rom 9:3 , and compare ch. Gal 5:10 ; also Ellic.’s and Bagge’s notes here).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Gal 1:8 . . Paul here associates with himself the colleagues Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, who had combined with him to preach the Gospel. He desires to impress on his disciples that the controversy is not between one teacher and another, but between truth and falsehood: no minister of Christ, not even an angel, can alter the truth in Christ. . The two derivatives, and , are both employed in the LXX and N.T. in different senses. serves, as in other Greek authors, to denote a temple offering, statue, or ornament ( cf. 2Ma 9:16 , Luk 21:5 ), while is restricted to the Hebrew conception of an offering devoted under a solemn vow to death or destruction (Lev 27:28 , Jos 7:1 , Act 23:14 ). The Epistles of Paul attach to the word the idea of spiritual death. The significant addition in Rom 9:3 associates with it the further idea of separation from Christ, and consequent loss of all Christian blessings and means of grace. It does not, like excommunication, pronounce a judicial sentence on particular convicted offenders, but solemnly affirms general laws of the spiritual kingdom, e.g. , in 1Co 16:22 , any who love not the Lord , here any who tamper with the truth of the Gospel, are pronounced outcasts from the faith, and dead to the Spirit of Christ.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

though = even if (Greek. ean. App-118. b).

heaven. See Mat 6:9, Mat 6:10,

preach, &c. = preach a gospel (Greek. evangelizo. App-121.)

beside (Greek. para. App-104.), or than, that.

have. Omit.

accursed. Greek. anathema. See Act 23:14 and Compare Gal 3:10, Gal 3:13.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

8.] But (no matter who they are . &c.) even though (in , , &c., the force of the is distributed over the whole supposition following, see Hartung, Partikell. i. 139; and is distinguished from , in supposing a case which has never occurred, see 1Co 13:1, and a full explanation in Herm. on Viger, p. 832) we (i.e. usually, I, Paul: but perhaps used here on account of , Gal 1:2) or an angel from heaven (. . to be taken together, not . .: introduced here as the highest possible authority, next to a divine Person: even were this possible, were the highest rank of created beings to furnish the preacher, &c. See 1Co 13:1. Perhaps also, as Chrys., there is a reference to the new teachers having sheltered themselves under the names of the great Apostles: , , … Then he adds: . , , , , , . , ), preach (evangelize: it is impossible to preserve in English the , and in it the reference back to Gal 1:6-7) to you other than what ( (reff.) as in , , , &c. not merely against, nor merely besides, but indicating beyond, in the sense of overstepping the limit into a new region, i.e. it points out specific difference. The preposition is important here, as it has been pressed by Protestants in the sense of besides, against Roman Catholic tradition, and in consequence maintained by the latter in the sense of against. It in fact includes both) we preached (evangelized) to you, let him be accursed (of God: no reference to ecclesiastical excommunication: for an angel is here included. See note, Rom 9:3, and compare ch. Gal 5:10; also Ellic.s and Bagges notes here).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Gal 1:8. ) We, many as we are, Gal 1:2.- , or an angel from heaven) whose authority, with the exception of God and Christ, is the highest, ch. Gal 4:14.- , which we have preached) This proves the apostolic infallibility.-, let him be [accursed] anathema) Deprived of all part in Christ and God. The antithesis is at Gal 6:16.-, let him be) Controversies not only cannot, but not even ought to be carried on without strong feeling; but that strong feeling ought to be holy feeling.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Gal 1:8

Gal 1:8

But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.-Pauls claim was that the gospel as he had preached it was complete, absolute, and final, and if he himself, or even an angel from heaven, should preach another gospel than that he had preached, let him be anathema-accursed.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

though: Gal 1:9, 1Co 16:22, 2Co 11:13, 2Co 11:14, 1Ti 1:19, 1Ti 1:20, Tit 3:10, Rev 22:18, Rev 22:19

let: Gal 3:10, Gal 3:13, Gen 9:25, Deu 27:15-26, Jos 9:23, 1Sa 26:19, Neh 13:25, Mat 25:41, 2Pe 2:14

accursed: Mar 14:71, Act 23:14, Rom 9:3, 1Co 12:3, 1Co 16:22,*Gr.

Reciprocal: Lev 15:8 – General Deu 13:8 – consent 1Ki 13:21 – Thus saith Pro 28:10 – causeth Isa 9:15 – the prophet Jer 16:20 – General Jer 23:16 – Hearken 2Co 11:4 – another gospel 2Co 11:15 – whose Gal 5:12 – cut Phi 4:4 – again 1Th 1:5 – our 1Pe 5:12 – true 2Jo 1:10 – come

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Gal 1:8. , -But if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any other gospel different from what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

There is some difference of reading. K, Theodoret, OEcumenius, have ; while A, , and others, have . There are also variations with regard to : F and omit it; B, H, place it before the verb; the majority of MSS. place it after the verb; while D has . But be the who they may who seek to subvert the gospel, they incur an awful peril. The belongs to , even if. The case put so strongly is one which may never have occurred; but its possibility is assumed, though it may be very improbable. Hermann, Opuscula, iv. p. 95; Hermann, Vigerus, vol. 2.664, London 1824; Jelf, 861. On the difference of and , see under Php 2:17; Khner, 824; Hartung, vol. i. pp. 139, etc. The -not himself alone, the pronoun being expressed and emphatic-may take in, though not necessarily, of Gal 1:2, or perhaps Silvanus and Timothy, fellow-preachers (Hofmann). He was speaking by divine commission when he preached, and he had no right to alter the message. If it should ever by any possibility happen that he did so, on him should fall the anathema. We or an angel from heaven-no fallen spirit who might rejoice in falsehood, but one ; the phrase being joined to , and not to the verb (2Co 11:14), which agrees with . An angel from heaven is highest created authority, but it cannot exalt itself against a divine commission. An angel preaching a Judaizing gospel would be opposing that God who had called them in the grace of Christ. Chrysostom supposes allusion to other apostles. The verb is here followed by the dative of person: Gal 4:13; Luk 4:18; Rom 1:15; 1Co 15:1; 1Pe 4:6. The variety of construction which it has in the New Testament-it being found sometimes absolutely, sometimes with accusative or dative, often with accusative of thing and dative of person-may have originated the variations connected with , though Lightfoot, from these variations, regards the word as doubtful. The spurious preaching is characterized as

-contrary to that which we preached to you (Ellicott), or beyond it (Alford). The can bear either meaning. Bernhardy, p. 259. The Vulgate has praeterquam, and some of the Greek fathers give the same sense, so Beza also; while against, contra, is the interpretation of Theodoret, Winer, Rckert, Matthies, De Wette, Jatho, Turner, Estius, Windischmann. Thus Rom 1:26, ; Act 18:13, ; Xen. Mem. 1.1, 18. Examples may be found in Donaldson, 485. What is specifically different from it, must in effect be contrary to it. Rom 11:24; Rom 16:17. Usually Catholic interpreters take the sense of contrary to (Estius, Bisping); and Lutherans adopt that of beyond, or in addition to, as if in condemnation (aus blinder Polemik, Bisping) of the traditions on which the Romish Church lays such stress. But the apostle refers to oral teaching only, and the preposition glancing back to , naturally signifies beside, that is, in addition to, or different from, the gospel,-or what is really another gospel. But the gospel is one, and can have no rival.

-let him be accursed (Gal 1:10). : the earlier classical form was , (Moeris). Lobeck, Phrynichus, p. 249. Thus , ; , . The general sense is, laid up, set apart to God: (Suidas). The meaning of the word in the New Testament is derived through the Septuagint, where it represents the Hebrew , H3051, something so set apart to God as to be destroyed or consecrated to divine vengeance. The other form, , retained its original meaning, comprehending all gifts to the gods. Xen. Anab. 5.3, 5. Such gifts were often ornamental, and Hesychius defines it by ; but the other form, , he identifies with . The distinction begins to appear in the Septuagint, though differences of reading prevent it being fully traced and recognised. In Lev 27:28-29, the living thing devoted to God is to be surely put to death: . . . : the city of Jericho, and all in it, was declared . Jos 6:16-17. This consecration of Jericho to utter ruin was in obedience to the command, Deu 13:14-16, , and was a reproduction of an older scene (Num 21:1-3), where a city was devoted, and then truly named , . Comp. Jos 7:11. In the case of Jericho, portion of the spoil was set apart for the sacred treasury, and part was to be utterly destroyed-two modes of consecration to God, for divine blessing and for divine curse-God glorified in it, or glorified on it. Trench, Syn. p. 17, 1st ser. In Eze 44:29, the offering of a dedicated thing given to the priests (the same Hebrew term) is rendered in the Septuagint, but by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. Orig. Hex. tom. ii. p. 321, ed. Montfaucon. In the Apocrypha the distinction appears to be preserved: 2Ma 9:16, ; 3Ma 3:14; Jdt 16:19; also in Joseph. Antiq. 15.11, 3, Bell. Jud 2:17; Jud 1:2:3. So in the New Testament, Luk 21:5, the temple adorned with goodly stones, , and gifts. But the other form, , occurs six times, and in all of them it has the meaning of accursed. Act 23:14; Rom 9:3; 1Co 12:3; 1Co 16:22; and Gal 1:8-9. Theodoret, on Rom 9:3, recognises this , which he gives to ; also on Isaiah 13, and on Zephaniah 1. See also Suidas, sub voce; Chrysostom on Rom 9:3; and Suicer, sub voce. Among the ecclesiastical writers, came to signify excommunication, the cursing and separation of one put out of communion. Bingham, Antiquities, Works, vol. v. p. 471, London 1844. Such a use of the word was natural. Council of Laodicea, Canon xxix. But to justify this use by any appeal to the New Testament is vain. Nowhere has it this meaning, but a darker and a more awful one. Nor does , H3051 in the Old Testament ever signify ecclesiastical separation; it is synonymous with , Isa 54:5; , 1Sa 15:21; , Deu 7:2. On the various forms of the Jewish curse, see Selden, De Syned. viii.; Opera, vol. i. p. 883, etc. The idea of excommunication cannot be adopted here (Grotius, Semler, Flatt, Baumgarten-Crusius, Hammond, and Waterland); for it is contrary to the usage of the New Testament, and could not be applicable to an angel from heaven. Excommunication is described in very different terms, as in Joh 9:22; Joh 12:42; Joh 16:2, or Luk 6:22, 1Co 5:2; 1Co 5:13. Winer, sub voce. How tame Grotius, cum eo nihil vobis sit commercii; or Rosenmller, excludatur e caetu vestro. The preacher of another gospel exposes himself to the divine indignation, and the awful penalty incurred by him is not inflicted by man: he falls into the hands of the living God. See Wieseler’s long note.

Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians

Gal 1:8. We have seen that some people questioned the apostleship of Paul (verse 1); on the other hand, some Judaizers charged that he was advocating the practice of circumcision as a religious necessity (chapter 5:11). A pretext for such a false claim may have been drawn from the fact that Paul had Timothy circumcised (Act 16:3), disregarding the fact that Timothy had Jewish blood in his veins, and thus had a right to it from a national standpoint. (See the comments at that place in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary.) However, even if Paul did preach such a false doctrine, that would not make it right but instead he would be under the curse of God. Angels from heaven were never permitted to preach the terms of salvation to any human individual, much less would they dare preach a gospel that contradicted the inspired one given by Paul.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Gal 1:8. But even though we ourselves (I and my colleagues, Gal 1:2), or an angel from heaven, should preach [unto you] any gospel other than that (beyond that) which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. It is impossible to express more strongly and solemnly the conviction of the unerring truth of the gospel as preached by Paul, the zeal for its purity, and the aversion to every heresy. Only an inspired Apostle could thus speak. The condemnation of the opponents is indirect, but the more certain by the argument a fortiori. The severity of Paul against false brethren was equalled by his forbearance with weak brethren (comp. Gal 6:1; Rom 14:1; Rom 15:1), All personal assumption and arrogance is here excluded, the more so as he conditionally includes himself and his colleagues in the anathema. His only motive was zeal for the purity of the gospel of his divine Lord and Master.

An angel from heaven, proverbial expression for a being possessed of the highest authority next to the divine. Beside that; lit., beyond what, which is both beside (prterea) and against (contra). The gospel admits of no rival, either in the form of foreign additions or in the form of changes. Paul condemns not indeed mere differences in form, such as existed even among the Apostles themselves, and will always exist, but every material alteration of the gospel, either by perversion, or omission, or such additions as contradict the spirit of apostolic teaching. The Judaizers did not expressly deny the doctrine of justification by faith, but they indirectly undermined it by adding the assertion of the coordinate necessity of circumcision; just as the Pharisees professed to hold fast to the Word of God in the Old Testament, and yet made it of none effect by their human traditions (comp. Mar 7:13). The passage admits of easy application to the unscriptural traditions of the Greek and Roman churches.

Let him be anathema, anathematized, i.e., devoted (in a bad sense), given over to the judgment of God. It is a solemn judgment of condemnation as in the name of God (comp. 1Co 16:22 : If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema; also Gal 3:13; Gal 5:10; Rom 9:3; 1Co 12:3). Subsequently, among the fathers the idea of ecclesiastical excommunication (accompanied sometimes with an execration) was attached to this term; but this is not the Biblical sense, and in our passage it is forbidden by the mention of an angel who cannot be excommunicated from the church.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe here, 1. How our apostle supposes an impossibility only for the confirmation of what he had before affirmed. He doth not suppose it possible for any angel in heaven, or apostle upon earth, to contradict the doctrine of the gospel which he had delivered, to preach any thing contrary to it, or besides it, or different from it; making that necessary to be believed and practiced, which Christ and his apostles never made necessary.

Learn hence, that the written word of God, without unwritten traditions, contains in it all things necessary to salvation; and whatever doctrines are propounded to the church, not only contrary to, but differing from it, or besides the written word, are cursed doctrines.

Observe, 2. The terrible Anathema which the apostle denounces against those, whoever they should be, be it an apostle upon earth, or an angel from heaven, that should thus pervert the gospel of Christ, by making any thing necessary to be believed or practiced in order to salvation, which Christ has not made necessary, Let him be accursed. Let the church of Rome in general, and the council of Trent in particular, dread the efficacy of this curse, who have added so many new articles to the Christian faith, and enforced them as necessary to be believed by all Christians; insomuch that they pronounced, “that no salvation can be obtained without the belief of them,” and denounced their anathemas against us who cannot believe them: but as their curse, causeless, shall not come, so we believe that they, propounding terms of salvation, nowhere delivered by Christ and his apostles, do bring themselves under the apostle’s anathema here in this text: for if the new articles of the church at Rome be necessary to salvation, than what Christ and his apostles delivered was not sufficient to salvation before; and thus the pride of man exalts itself above the wisdom of God.

Observe, 3. How the apostle expresses his assurance in this matter; and to shew that he did not speak rashly, and in a heat, but upon due consideration, he repeats again, As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach otherwise, let him be accursed Gal 1:9.

Note here, how positive and peremptory the apostle is in this matter: and doubtless this one Anathema of his, is more dreadful than all the bruta fulmina, the freakish anathema, of an enthusiastic church, who, in a manifest affront to the authority of St. Pual, has presumed to add so many new articles to the Christian religion, for which there is not the least ground or warrant, either from the holy scriptures, or any of the ancient creeds.

Observe lastly, how the apostle puts himself into the number, if I, or any man, or any angel preach otherwise, let him be accursed. As if the apostle had said, “Not only the false apostles are to be rejected, but I myself deserve to be anathematized, and accounted an execrable person, should I preach any other doctrine to you, than what you have received from Christ by me; nay, should any angel from heaven attempt it, he ought to be detested for it.”

Learn, that no angel in heaven, no person or church upon earth, have power to make new articles of faith, or to impose any thing upon our belief or practice, that is either against or besides the written word, or any ways inconsistent with it, or contrary unto it.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Oooops, sorry Mormon readers – that was God speaking, not me!

I had a professor in graduate school that loved puns, so he was one of my favorite professors. He read this passage once as follows: “But though we, or an angel, (affectionately called phony Morony) from heaven, preach any other gospel….” Neither he nor I mean any disrespect to the Mormon follower, but would wish to point out that if you have even an angel from heaven telling you that what is recorded in the Word is not the complete gospel, let HIM BE ACCURSED.

Anyone that adds to the Word of God is accursed. This applies to all that follow traditions, confessions, versions, etc. that are over and above the Word. Many today set tradition, books and teachings above the Word of God – these are accursed according to Paul.

I have seen reformed people that do not really teach that the confessions are above the Word, but they practice it. They speak of teaching their confessions to their families, rather than teaching them the Word of God. Indeed, their gospel at times seems to be another gospel, for they seem to require following of the creeds as the standard of acceptance rather than the obedience to the Word.

The term “heaven” is used of the sky, the universe or the dwelling place of God. In this context it would indicated God’s dwelling place, in that the angels have access to all, but dwell in the same place as God Himself.

As a complete side note, take a few moments and contemplate the life of an angel, able to transit from God’s throne, though the galaxies, through the atmosphere and to earth – how much like those wonderful dreams when we fly above the ground and go where we will to and fro with little if any effort – this is the normal life of the angel – and just why would an angel turn against God and give all this up to follow Satan – another topic of contemplation!

Some fine points from the verse:

1. The preaching of another gospel is a present tense as opposed to the gospel preached by Paul which is an aorist. The gospel of Christ was preached once and they accepted it, but this false gospel is continually being preached to them.

Once and for all your salvation was sealed at one point in time. To sway you from that truth takes persistence – don’t allow persistence of error to rob you of truth.

2. The language used here is of interest. Loosely translated it runs along this line: But though we, or an angel from heaven, EVANGELIZE unto you than that which EVANGELIZE unto you let him be accursed. The American Standard version states “But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema”

The force of this is that these people are attempting to evangelize just as Paul had evangelized them – equal force is the thought – as I evangelized you so they are evangelizing you – even though they appear to be as I – though they seem to be concerned with your spiritual health – let them be accursed. In essence isn’t Paul also implying that the Judaizers felt that the people were lost and in need of their gospel – that without Christ and the Law, they would be lost to hell? I think that is the direct implication.

Now, such language – this Paul ought not be so mean and rude to these people, after all they have my best interest at heart and he is telling me they are accursed. Where does he get off being so judgmental? Does this sound like some you have run into? Paul says these that mislead, these that teach falsely, these that would remove you from your peace, and these that would substitute the gospel of grace are accursed!

I suggest we use the same tactics that Paul used – call these false teachers what they are – accursed. The Mormon’s that mislead are accursed, they are not part of Christianity, they are not just another way to God, and they are accursed.

Those that would have you work for your salvation are accursed.

Those that would have you do more than accept Christ are accursed.

Those that would have you replace the work of the cross with works of your own are accursed.

I think that is plain enough for now!

3. The term translated accursed is the Greek word “anathema” which means to put under a great curse. The Net Bible ends this verse with the thought of condemned to hell. A footnote suggests that not only is the curse in view but the result as well. If the person is accursed, they are definitely on their way to eternal punishment.

Paul uses the same term again in the next verse when he restates his curse. The word is also used in the following texts.

Act 23:14 “And they came to the chief priests and elders, and said, We have bound ourselves under a great curse, that we will eat nothing until we have slain Paul.” I won’t comment on the priests and elders but this might be a little exaggeration for effect on their part. They had sworn to not eat until they killed Paul. To them a noble effort, to God a foolish effort, but I’m sure they wanted him dead – not just sure they would have starved to death if they couldn’t have killed him.

Rom 9:3 “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:” Here we see the word used in the reality that if it were true it would result in hell for the one accursed. Paul would give himself up to hell if his brethren – the Jews – could be saved.

1Co 12:3 “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” Again, we see the thought of the one accursed ending in hell (not that Christ could).

1Co 16:22 “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.” Here as in the last three verses the result of the accursed is hell. The word is not translated here, just presented in its original Greek form.

A moment of application if we might. Paul tells them that the Judaizers were accursed – they are trying to live by keeping the law for salvation – they are on their way to hell, so anyone trusting in keeping the law is damned. Remember that. Indeed, it would seem that trusting anything but the blood of Christ for salvation is trusting the wrong thing and places the person on a fast track to eternal damnation.

A sincere warning to anyone trying to keep the law or any list of do’s and don’ts to gain salvation – you won’t be able to based on Paul’s teaching here. Consider carefully what you trust for salvation, since only the blood of Christ will do. If you want to work and/or keep something feel free to do so as a way to please God, but don’t you dare expect salvation from it.

4. Even if Paul or the apostles come teaching – don’t you believe them. No matter what they say, if they preach another gospel than the one preached originally – don’t you believe them.

Application: Question ALL you read and hear and trust nothing unless it lines up squarely with the Word of God. Even if it comes from a trusted friend, a trusted teacher, a trusted preacher, or a trusted acquaintance, don’t you accept it unless you first compare it to the Word of God.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be {g} accursed.

(g) See Rom 9:3 .

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Paul leveled his strongest verbal artillery against these teachers. Whoever they were, they apparently claimed the highest authority for their teaching since Paul warned his readers to reject it even if it had come from angelic messengers sent directly from heaven. This is an example of hyperbole: exaggeration for the sake of emphasis. [Note: See Tenney, p. 138, for a chart of the figures of speech in Galatians.] By "accursed" Paul meant under God’s judgment. Islam claims that Mohammed received his revelations from the angel Gabriel.

"In Paul’s eyes, the acknowledgment of Jesus as Messiah logically implied the abrogation of the law . . . If Christ displaced the law as the activating centre of Paul’s own life, he equally displaced the law in the economy of God, in the ordering of salvation-history. Therefore, if the law was still in force as a way of salvation and life, the messianic age had not yet dawned, and Jesus accordingly was not the Messiah." [Note: Bruce, p. 83.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)