Galatians 1:19

Galatians 1:19. But I saw no other of the Apostles but only James. The other Apostles were probably absent on a mission to the scattered churches of the provinces (comp. Acts 9:31). The James here spoken of is not James the elder, the son of Zebedee and Salome, and brother of St. John, who was still living at that time (he was beheaded in 44 as the first martyr among the Apostles, Acts 12:2), but the same who, after the departure of Peter from Palestine (Acts 12:17), presided over the congregation of Jerusalem (Acts 15:13; Acts 22:18), and is frequently called ‘brother of the Lord,' as here, or simply James (so in the Acts and Galatians 2), or by the fathers ‘Bishop of Jerusalem,' also ‘James the Just.' Josephus, the Jewish historian, mentions him under the name of ‘James the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ,' and reports his martyrdom A. D. 62 (Antiq. xx. 9, 1). According to Hegesippus he died later, about A. D. 69. The exceptive words ‘but only,' (or, ‘if not,' ‘save,' ‘unless it be') do not necessarily imply that this James was one of the twelve Apostles, and identical with James the younger (who is called ‘James the son of Alphæus'); but it intimates rather, in connection with what precedes, and with his characteristic title here given, that he was, like Barnabas (Acts 14:14; comp. Acts 9:27), an Apostle only in the wider sense, who, owing to his character, position, and relationship to the Lord, enjoyed apostolical authority. The sense then is: ‘the only other man of prominence and authority I saw was James.' [1]

[1] The question depends philologically upon the connection of the Greek particle ε ἰ μή. If connected with the whole sentence (‘I saw no other Apostle save James'). it includes James among the Apostles; if connected only with ‘I saw' (‘but I saw James'), it excludes him. The latter is the force of the particle in Galatians 2:16; Matthew 12:4; Luke 4:26-27; Revelation 21:27. (See Wieseler's Com.)

The brother of the Lord. To distinguish him from the two Apostles of that name. ‘Brother' is not cousin (for which Paul has the proper Greek term, Colossians 4:10), but either a uterine brother, i.e., a younger son of Joseph and Mary (which is the most natural view; comp. the words ‘ till' and ‘ first born' in Matthew 1:25, and Luke 2:7); or a son of Joseph from a previous marriage, and hence a step-son of Mary and a step-brother of Jesus. Comp. on the brothers of the Lord (James, Joses, Simon, and Judas), Matthew 1:25; Matthew 12:46; Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 2:12; John 7:3-10; Acts 1:14. The cousin-theory of the Roman church (dating from Jerome and Augustine at the close of the fourth century) is exegetically untenable, and was suggested chiefly by a doctrinal and ascetic bias in favor of the perpetual virginity of Mary and Joseph, The following reasons are conclusive against it and in favor of a closer relationship: (1.) the natural meaning of the term ‘brother,' of which there is no exception in the New Testament, and scarcely in the Old; (2.) the fact that these brothers and sisters appear in the Gospels constantly in close connection with the holy family; (3.) they are represented as unbelieving before the resurrection (John 7:5), which excludes them from the Twelve; (4.) they are always distinguished from the Twelve (John 2:17; John 7:3-10; Acts 1:14; 1 Corinthians 9:5). The old Greek fathers also (Origen, Eusebius, Epiphanius, etc.), clearly distinguish James the brother of the Lord from the two Apostles of that name.