An Exploration of Conditional Clause Exegesis 381 formula was intended “precisely to envision the seemingly unthinkable, and thus to include all forms of heresy” (93). The shift from the first person plural of wJ" proeirhvkamen to the first person singular in a[rti pavlin levgw might support the view that v. 9 refers to a previous occasion, rather than to the statement in v. 8. The latter option seems to require that the authoring of v. 9 was in some way distinct from that of v. 8. This is not impossible, since the letter is introduced as from Pau'lo" ajpovstolo"…kai; oiJ su;n ejmoi; pavnte" ajdelfoiv. Various commentators suggest that this plural attribution of the letter just reflects endorsement of Paul’s message by his companions (94), but contribution to the shaping of its content cannot be ruled out. Under these circumstances Paul may have wished, by the use of the first person singular, to emphasise his personal approval of the statement concerning the preaching of a contrary gospel. The positioning of the wJ" proeirhvkamen clause between the two parallel conditions is striking. If the use of these conditional clause formulas did hark back to a previous occasion, it is surprising that wJ" proeirhvkamen kai; a[rti pavlin levgw does not precede the first of the two conditions, especially as the first is more general. On balance it is therefore preferable to regard wJ" proeirhvkamen as a reference back to v. 8 rather than to a previous occasion, with the first person singular of levgw representing a very personal endorsement of the point by Paul himself. One effect of placing these two very similar conditions in such proximity is actually to highlight their differences. The presence of one of these clauses influences the semantic possibilities of the other. Thus while the first class condition with its indicative protasis may not on its own tell the reader very much about such matters as fulfilment / unfulfilment, its juxtaposition with the third class clause might shed further light on such matters. In v. 8 Paul uses hyperbole to make his point, choosing an improbable supposition to make a general point. Bruce describes his language at this point as “rather rhetorical”, and suggests that Paul emphasises the seriousness with which he is speaking by repeating his point “more soberly” (95) in v. 9. The Galatians cannot then just dismiss v. 8 as a rhetorical flight of fancy. Both Burton and Betz attach (93) BETZ, Galatians, 53. (94) E.g. LONGENECKER, Galatians, 5; BRUCE Epistle, 74; BETZ, Galatians, 40. (95) BRUCE, Epistle, 84.