The strongest argument for Pauline authorship in this epistle involves the ancient tradition of the church. As early as the second century Paul was regarded in the East as the author, and during the 3rd century his authorship was the accepted view. In the West where the epistle was known from earliest times, Pauline authorship was rejected and did not gain general acceptance until the forth century. Yet the strongest argument against Pauline authorship is found within the epistle itself. In 2:3 the author regards himself as one whose knowledge of Christ was secondhand. By contrast Paul vehemently declares that his apostleship and message were directly from Jesus Christ (Gal.1:1 &12) Other worthy suggestions include Luke , Barnabas Silas and Apollos. The arguments that speak against Paul’s authorship, speak for Lucan authorship: his second hand knowledge of Jesus and even the witness of ancient church traditions. Though such scholars as Calvin and Delitzsch have supported Lucan authorship that Luke was a Gentile remains a major obstacle. Both Barnabas and Silas were leaders in the Jerusalem church and thus had the status to write to Jewish Christians wherever they lived. Barnabas was even a Levite and as such would have been familiar with the Levitical ritual commonly cited in this epistle. The major argument against the authorship of both Barnabas and Silas is that there is little positive evidence for it. The early church did not regard either one of these men as author.