These words of the Apostle can be taken as a certain exaggeration, hyperbolice. They do not mean that an apostle or an angel from heaven could preach otherwise than they had previously said. But even if it could be that apostles and angels changed, still one must not depart from what was once received.
This must especially be thought when the Apostle himself shows the firmness of his faith, saying elsewhere: "I know that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers. Nor things present nor things to come, nor power, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom 8:38). "I speak the truth to you, I do not lie, since my conscience bears me witness" (Rom 9:1).
Undoubtedly, this is not said by one who could ever depart from faith in Christ and love for Him.
But those who wish to see in these words an actual truth, and not a supposition, kath' hypothesin dictum, hold that even the Apostles and even the angels can turn to evil. They present as proof that the Apostle Paul himself knew that he could fall if he lived more negligently. This is clear from his words: "But I subdue and enslave my body, lest, after preaching to others, I myself should be condemned" (1 Cor 9:27).
It is also clear from the fact that the angels who did not keep their first estate, but left their own dwelling, were capable of change. "They are kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day" (Jude 1:6).
Only the nature of God alone is unchangeable. Of this it is written: "You are the same" (Ps 101:28). And He Himself says of Himself: "I am your God, and I do not change" (Mal 3:6).
That the light-bearer, lucifer, who rises in the morning, fell is as well known as the fact that the one once sent to all nations was crushed upon the earth.
The learned man Tertullian wrote skillfully concerning this passage against Apelles and his sister Philumena. She was possessed by a certain angel of a diabolical and corrupt spirit. He wrote that this is the angel against whom, long before the birth of Apelles, the Holy Spirit prophetically pronounced anathema through the mouth of the Apostle.
Then anathema is a word properly Hebrew, and it is used both in the book of Joshua and in the book of Numbers (Josh 6:17-18; Num 21:2-3). There the Lord commanded that everything in Jericho and everything belonging to the Midianites be considered under ban and exclusion.
Let us ask those who consider Christ and the Apostle Paul to be, the One, the Son, and the other, the servant of a good and still then unknown God, who did not know how to curse or condemn anyone. How does His Apostle use a word of the Jews, that is, of the Creator, and express the wish that either an Apostle or an angel should perish, although He Himself did not wish to take vengeance?
His addition, "As we said before, so again I repeat," shows that at the beginning the Apostle had also warned against this same thing. That is, he had proclaimed the exclusion of those who would teach otherwise. Now, after such preaching has appeared, he pronounces the exclusion that he had earlier foretold.
Therefore he pronounced exclusion even upon himself, since he was accused of doing one thing in Judea and preaching another among the Gentiles. He also pronounced it against an angel, who, as everyone knew, was higher in dignity even than his predecessors, the Apostles.
Thus, according to his words, even the authority, auctoritas, of Peter and John must not be considered so great. Paul did not regard it as permissible either for himself, who had taught the Galatians earlier, or for an angel, to preach otherwise than what they had previously been taught.
Therefore he named only himself and an angel, while indicating the rest without name: "If anyone," he says, "preaches to you." By the general word "anyone" he avoided offending his predecessors, yet in a hidden way he indicated their names.
The Greek arche and Latin principatus are rendered in Slavonic as principality and in Russian as dignity. In translations of this passage into modern languages there is some disagreement. English and Polish render it "first estate"; French and Italian, "their origin, beginning, kind"; German and Czech, "their principality." We have retained the translation of the majority, which fully corresponds to Greek arche and Latin principatus. In our opinion, however, Greek arche corresponds more to Latin principium than to principatus.