οτε δε ευδοκησεν ο αφορισας με εκ κοιλιας μητρος μου καλεσας με δια της χαριτος αυτου αποκαλυφαι τον υιον αυτου εν μοι, ινα ευαγγελιζωμαι αυτον εν τοις εθνεσιν.
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the gentiles… (Galatians 1:15-16; ESV)
But when the one who set me apart from my mother’s womb by having called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me, in order that I might go on proclaiming him among the gentiles… (Galatians 1:15-16; my translation)
The first chapter of Paul’s epistle to the Galatians is filled with important decesions in translation to be made. For example, should verse 12 be understood as talking about a revelation of Jesus the Messiah, or a revelation from him? Likewise, verse 16 contains a seemingly simple prepositional phrase, yet flavours the text radically depending upon him it is used. In English Bibles, Galatians 1:16 is more often than not translated “to reveal his Son to me” instead of “in me” which at least at first glance follows the Greek more naturally. The reasons for translations opting for “to me” maybe has to do with it being easier for English readers to grasp, or because it fits Paul’s “Damascus conversion” as narrated in Acts all the more. I understand the reasoning, especially in regards to the latter point. For although it is not explicitly stated, the Damascus incident is most probably in view in light of verse 17 (“and again I returned to Damascus”) .
“In me” over against “to me” might cast the revelation in more mysterious light, portraying it as a merely subjective mystical experience, i.e there was no real objective resurrection appearance, nor was there even a vision of the risen Lord for the eyes to see, but instead it was something that happened within Paul. I suppose that would be a possibility, but that is not how I have read the passage.
For why do we assume that the revelation of God’s Son is the revealing of the Son to Paul, rather than to the Gentiles through Paul. “He was pleased to reveal his Son through me, so that I might go on evangelising him among the gentiles”. The thing that pleased he who set apart and called Paul, was to use him as an instrument for the proclamation of the good news for the Gentiles. This echoes the tradition found in Isaiah (and alluded to in Acts 13, and Romans 2) of God setting up a light unto the nations. It is not fully captured by the wording “by/through me”, I therefore prefer “in me”. For “in me” convetys that the Gentiles are now seeing the revelation of Jesus and God’s covenant faithfulness in the face of Paul (to borrow a phrase or two from Wright and 2 Cor 4:6)
In short, clearly the prefered translation of εν μοι is “in me”. What is important to keep in mind is that it does not explain in what sphere the revelation took place, but for what purpose. It is not about Jesus being seen by Paul, but Jesus being seen by gentiles in Paul.
ΝΟΜΟΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ 