Text -- Galatians 4:24 (NET)

4:24 These things may be treated as an allegory, for these women represent two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai bearing children for slavery; this is Hagar.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Gal 4:24

Which things contain an allegory ( hatina estin allēgoroumena ).

Literally, "Which things are allegorized"(periphrastic present passive indicative of allēgoreō ). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used ainittomai to speak in riddles. It is compounded of allo , another, and agoreuō , to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses tupikōs in 1Co 10:11 of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan’ s Pilgrim’ s Progress , the Prodigal Son in Luke 15, the Good Shepherd in John 10. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo’ s allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it.

Robertson: Gal 4:24

For these are ( hautai gar eisin ).

Allegorically interpreted, he means.

Robertson: Gal 4:24

From Mount Sinai ( apo orous Sinā ).

Spoken from Mount Sinai.

Robertson: Gal 4:24

Bearing ( gennōsa ).

Present active participle of gennaō , to beget of the male (Matthew 1:1-16), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luk 1:13, Luk 1:57).

Robertson: Gal 4:24

Which is Hagar ( hētis estin Hagar ).

Allegorically interpreted.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

Are an allegory ( ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα )

N.T.o . Lit. are allegorised . From ἄλλο another , ἀγορεύειν to speak . Hence, things which are so spoken as to give a different meaning from that which the words express. For parable , allegory , fable , and proverb , see on Mat 13:3. An allegory is to be distinguished from a type . An O.T. type is a real prefiguration of a N.T. fact, as the Jewish tabernacle explained in Hebrews 9, or the brazen serpent, Joh 3:14. Comp. Rom 5:14; 1Co 10:6, 1Co 10:11. An allegory exhibits figuratively the ideal character of a fact. The type allows no latitude of interpretation. The allegory lends itself to various interpretations. This passage bears traces of Paul's rabbinical training. At the time of Christ, Scripture was overlaid with that enormous mass of rabbinic interpretation which, beginning as a supplement to the written law, at last superseded and threw it into contempt. The plainest sayings of Scripture were resolved into another sense; and it was asserted by one of the Rabbis that he that renders a verse of Scripture as it appears, says what is not true. The celebrated Akiba assumed that the Pentateuch was a continuous enigma, and that a meaning was to be found in every monosyllable, and a mystical sense in every hook and flourish of the letters. The Talmud relates how Akiba was seen by Moses in a vision, drawing from every horn of every letter whole bushels of decisions. The oral laws, subsequently reduced to writing in the Talmud, completely overshadowed and superseded the Scriptures, so that Jesus was literally justified in saying: " Thus have ye make the commandment of God of none effect through your tradition."

Paul had been trained as a Rabbi in the school of Hillel, the founder of the rabbinical system, whose hermeneutic rules were the basis of the Talmud. As Jowett justly says: " Strange as it may at first appear that Paul's mode of interpreting the Old Testament Scriptures should not conform to our laws of logic or language, it would be far stranger if it had not conformed with the natural modes of thought and association in his own day." His familiarity with this style of exposition gave him a real advantage in dealing with Jews.

It is a much-mooted question whether, in this passage, Paul is employing an argument or an illustration. The former would seem to be the case. On its face, it seems improbable that, as Dr. Bruce puts it: " it is poetry rather than logic, meant not so much to convince the reason as to captivate the imagination." Comp. the argument in Gal 3:16, and see note. It appears plain that Paul believed that his interpretation actually lay hidden in the O.T. narrative, and that he adduced it as having argumentative force. Whether he regarded the correspondence as designed to extend to all the details of his exposition may be questioned; but he appears to have discerned in the O.T. narrative a genuine type, which he expanded into his allegory. For other illustrations of this mode of treatment, see Rom 2:24; Rom 9:33; 1Co 2:9; 1Co 9:9, 1Co 9:10; 1Co 10:1-4.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

For these are

Hagar and Sarah are , allegorically. Signify. Comp. Mat 13:20, Mat 13:38; Mat 26:26, Mat 26:28; 1Co 10:4, 1Co 10:16.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

The one

Covenant.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

From Mount Sinai ( ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινά )

The covenant emanating from Sinai: made on that mountain. The old covenant. See 2Co 3:14.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

Which gendereth to bondage ( εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα )

That is, the Sinaitic covenant places its children in a condition of bondage; note the personification and the allegorical blending of fact and figure.

Vincent: Gal 4:24

Which is Hagar ( ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἅραβίᾳ )

The Sinaitic covenant is that which, in Abraham's history, is Hagar: which is allegorically identified with Hagar the bondmaid.

Wesley: Gal 4:24

An allegory is a figurative speech, wherein one thing is expressed, and another intended. For those two sons are types of the two covenants. One covenant is that given from mount Sinai, which beareth children to bondage - That is, all who are under this, the Jewish covenant, are in bondage. Which covenant is typified by Agar.

JFB: Gal 4:24

Rather, "are allegorical," that is, have another besides the literal meaning.

JFB: Gal 4:24

"these [women] are (that is, mean; omit 'the' with all the oldest manuscripts) two covenants." As among the Jews the bondage of the mother determined that of the child, the children of the free covenant of promise, answering to Sarah, are free; the children of the legal covenant of bondage are not so.

JFB: Gal 4:24

That is, taking his origin from Mount Sinai. Hence, it appears, he is treating of the moral law (Gal 3:19) chiefly (Heb 12:18). Paul was familiar with the district of Sinai in Arabia (Gal 1:17), having gone thither after his conversion. At the gloomy scene of the giving of the Law, he learned to appreciate, by contrast, the grace of the Gospel, and so to cast off all his past legal dependencies.

JFB: Gal 4:24

That is, bringing forth children unto bondage. Compare the phrase (Act 3:25), "children of the covenant which God made . . . saying unto Abraham."

JFB: Gal 4:24

That is, Hagar.

Clarke: Gal 4:24

Which things are an allegory - They are to be understood spiritually; more being intended in the account than meets the eye

Allegory, from αλλος, another, and αγορεω, or αγορευω, to speak, signifies a thing that is a representative of another, where the literal sense is the representative of a spiritual meaning; or, as the glossary expresses it, ἑτερως κατα μεταφρασιν νοουμενα, και ου κατα την αναγνωσιν· "where the thing is to be understood differently in the interpretation than it appears in the reading.

Allegories are frequent in all countries, and are used by all writers. In the life of Homer, the author, speaking of the marriage of Jupiter and Juno, related by that poet, says: δοκει ταυτα αλληγορεισθαι, ὁτι Ἡρα μεν νοειται ὁ αηρ - Ζευς δε, ὁ αιθηρ· "It appears that these things are to be understood allegorically; for Juno means the air, Jupiter the ether."Plutarch, in his treatise De Iside et Osir., says: ὡσπερ Ἑλληνες Κρονον αλληγορουσι τον χρονον· "As the Greeks allegorize Cronos (Saturn) into Chronos (Time.)"It is well known how fond the Jews were of allegorizing. Every thing in the law was with them an allegory. Their Talmud is full of these; and one of their most sober and best educated writers, Philo, abounds with them. Speaking (De Migrat. Abrah., page 420) of the five daughters of Zelophehad, he says: ἁς αλληγορουντες αισθησεις ειναι φαμεν· "which, allegorizing, we assert to be the five senses!

It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here, St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles; and neither he nor we have any thing farther to do with this allegory than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds who endeavor to find out allegories in every portion of the sacred writings, and, by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God

Clarke: Gal 4:24

For these are the two covenants - These signify two different systems of religion; the one by Moses, the other by the Messiah

Clarke: Gal 4:24

The one from the Mount Sinai - On which the law was published; which was typified by Hagar, Abraham’ s bond maid

Clarke: Gal 4:24

Which gendereth to bondage - For as the bond maid or slave could only gender - bring forth her children, in a state of slavery, and subject also to become slaves, so all that are born and live under those Mosaic institutions are born and live in a state of bondage - a bondage to various rites and ceremonies; under the obligation to keep the whole law, yet, from its severity and their frailness, obliged to live in the habitual breach of it, and in consequence exposed to the curse which it pronounces.

Calvin: Gal 4:24

24.These are the two covenants. I have thought it better to adopt this translation, in order not to lose sight of the beauty of the comparison; for Paul compares the twoδιαθὢκαι, to two mothers, and to employ testamentum, (a testament,) which is a neuter noun, for denoting a mother, would be harsh. The word pactio (a covenant) appears to be, on that account, more appropriate; and indeed the desire of obtaining perspicuity, as well as elegance, has led me to make this choice. ⁷⁶

The comparison is now formally introduced. As in the house of Abraham there were two mothers, so are there also in the Church of God. Doctrine is the mother of whom we are born, and is twofold, Legal and Evangelical. The legal mother, whom Hagar resembles, gendereth to bondage. Sarah again, represents the second, which gendereth to freedom; though Paul begins higher, and makes our first mother Sinai, and our second, Jerusalem. The two covenants, then, are the mothers, of whom children unlike one another are born; for the legal covenant makes slaves, and the evangelical covenant makes freemen.

But all this may, at first sight, appear absurd; for there are none of God’s children who are not born to freedom, and therefore the comparison does not apply. I answer, what Paul says is true in two respects; for the law formerly brought forth its disciples, (among whom were included the holy prophets, and other believers,) to slavery, though not to permanent slavery, but because God placed them for a time under the law as “a schoolmaster.” ⁷⁷ (Gal 3:25.) Under the vail of ceremonies, and of the whole economy by which they were governed, their freedom was concealed: to the outward eye nothing but slavery appeared. “Ye have not,” says Paul to the Romans, “received the spirit of bondage again to fear.” (Rom 8:15.) Those holy fathers, though inwardly they were free in the sight of God, yet in outward appearance differed nothing from slaves, and thus resembled their mother’s condition. But the doctrine of the gospel bestows upon its children perfect freedom as soon as they are born, and brings them up in a liberal manner.

Paul does not, I acknowledge, speak of that kind of children, as the context will show. By the children of Sinai, it will afterwards be explained, are meant hypocrites, who are at length expelled from the Church of God, and deprived of the inheritance. What, then, is the gendering to bondage, which forms the subject of the present dispute? It denotes those who make a wicked abuse of the law, by finding in it nothing but what tends to slavery. Not so the pious fathers, who lived under the Old Testament; for their slavish birth by the law did not hinder them from having Jerusalem for their mother in spirit. But those who adhere to the bare law, and do not acknowledge it to be “a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ,” (Gal 3:24,) but rather make it a hinderance to prevent their coming to him, are the Ishmaelites born to slavery.

It will again be objected, why does the apostle say that such persons are born of God’s covenant, and are considered to belong to the Church? I answer, strictly speaking, they are not God’s children, but are degenerate and spurious, and are disclaimed by God, whom they falsely call their Father. They receive this name in the Church, not because they are members of it in reality, but because for a time they presume to occupy that place, and impose on men by the disguise which they wear. The apostle here views the Church, as it appears in this world: but on this subject we shall afterwards speak.

Defender: Gal 4:24

When God's Word is meant to be interpreted allegorically, the text indicates such. Symbolic, figurative, or parabolic language is occasionally used in the Bible, but this is normally clearly evident in the context. When the author does not indicate such language, the safe and proper way to interpret a text is not to interpret it at all but simply to assume it means exactly what it says and to proceed on that basis. On the other hand, even this allegory is predicated on the actual historicity of the story of Sarah and Hagar, Isaac and Ishmael. In no way does Paul suggest that the events discussed did not really happen. The "spiritualizing" method of interpreting historical narratives (such as the Genesis record of creation) to avoid having to accept them as real history is always unscriptural and dishonoring to God and His Word. In the special case here, both the historical record and the allegorical lesson derived from it must be taken as divinely inspired.

Defender: Gal 4:24

Hagar, Sarah's maid, was the mother of a son sired by Abraham when he and Sarah became impatient in waiting for the promised son, Isaac. In the allegory, Hagar represents the law given at Sinai as well as the city of Jerusalem, whose "children," like their mother, are in bondage under the law (Gal 4:25)."

TSK: Gal 4:24

an allegory : Eze 20:49; Hos 11:10; Mat 13:35; 1Co 10:11 *Gr: Heb 11:19

for : Gal 4:25; Luk 22:19, Luk 22:20; 1Co 10:4

the two : Gal 3:15-21; Heb 7:22, Heb 8:6-13, Heb 9:15-24, Heb 10:15-18, Heb 12:24, Heb 13:20

covenants : or, testament

Sinai : Gr. Sina

which : Gal 5:1; Rom 8:15

Agar : Gen 16:3, Gen 16:4, Gen 16:8, Gen 16:15, Gen 16:16, Gen 21:9-13, Gen 25:12, Hagar

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Gal 4:24

Which things - The different accounts of Ishmael and Isaac.

Are an allegory - May be regarded allegorically, or as illustrating great principles in regard to the condition of slaves and freemen; and may therefore be used to illustrate the effect of servitude to the Law of Moses compared with the freedom of the gospel. He does not mean to say that the historical record of Moses was not true, or was merely allegorical; nor does he mean to say that Moses meant this to be an allegory, or that he intended that it should be applied to the exact purpose to which Paul applied it. No such design is apparent in the narrative of Moses, and it is evident that he had no such intention. Nor can it be shown that Paul means to be understood as saying that Moses had any such design, or that his account was not a record of a plain historical fact. Paul uses it as he would any other historical fact that would illustrate the same principle, and he makes no more use of it than the Saviour did in his parables of real or fictitious narratives to illustrate an important truth, or than we always do of real history to illustrate an important principle.

The word which is used here by Paul ( ἀλληγορέω allēgoreō ) is derived from ἄλλος allos , another, and ἀγορεύω agoreuō , to speak, to speak openly or in public - Passow. It properly means to speak anything otherwise than it is understood (Passow); to speak allegorically; to allegorize. The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, nor is it found in the Septuagint, though it occurs often in the classic writers. An allegory is a continued metaphor; see Blair’ s Lectures, xv. It is a figurative sentence or discourse, in which the principal object is described by another subject resembling it in its properties and circumstances - Webster. Allegories are in words what hieroglyphics are in painting. The distinction between a parable and an allegory is said to be, that a parable is a supposed history to illustrate some important truth, as the parable of the good Samaritan, etc.; an allegory is based on real facts.

It is not probable, however, that this distinction is always carefully observed. Sometimes the allegory is based on the resemblance to some inanimate object, as in the beautiful allegory in Ps. 80. Allegories, parables, and metaphors abound in the writings of the East. Truth was more easily treasured up in this way, and could be better preserved and transmitted when it was connected with an interesting story. The lively fancy of the people of the East also led them to this mode of communicating truth; though a love for it is probably founded in human nature. The best sustained allegory of any considerable length in the world is, doubtless, Bunyan’ s Pilgrim’ s Progress; and yet this is among the most popular of all books. The ancient Jews were exceedingly fond of allegories, and even turned a considerable part of the Old Testament into allegory. The ancient Greek philosophers also were fond of this mode of teaching.

Pythagoras instructed his followers in this manner, and this was common among the Greeks, and was imitated much by the early Christians - Calmet. Many of the Christian fathers, of the school of Origen, made the Old Testament almost wholly allegorical, and found mysteries in the plainest narratives. The Bible became thus with them a book of enigmas, and exegesis consisted in an ingenious and fanciful accommodation of all the narratives in the scriptures to events in subsequent times. The most fanciful, and the most ingenious man, on this principle, was the best interpreter; and as any man might attach any hidden mystery which he chose to the scriptures, they became wholly useless as an infallible guide. Better principles of interpretation now prevail; and the great truth has gone forth, never more to be recalled, that the Bible is to be interpreted on the same principle as all other books; that its language is to be investigated by the same laws as language in all other books; and that no more liberty is to be taken in allegorizing the scriptures than may be taken with Herodotus or Livy. It is lawful to use narratives of real events to illustrate important principles always. Such a use is often made of history; and such a use, I suppose, the apostle Paul makes here of an important fact in the history of the Old Testament.

For these are - These may be used to represent the two covenants. The apostle could not mean that the sons of Sarah and Hagar were literally the two covenants; for this could not be true, and the declaration would be unintelligible. In what sense could Ishmael be called a covenant? The meaning, therefore, must be, that they furnished an apt illustration or representation of the two covenants; they would show what the nature of the two covenants was. The words "are"and "is"are often used in this sense in the Bible, to denote that one thing represents another. Thus in the institution of the Lord’ s supper; "Take, eat, this is my body"Mat 26:26; that is, this represents my body. The bread was not the living body that was then before them. So in Gal 4:28; "This is my blood of the new covenant;"that is, this represents my blood. The wine in the cup could not be the living blood of the Redeemer that was then flowing in his veins; see the note at that place; compare Gen 41:26.

The two covenants - Margin, "Testaments."The word means here, covenants or compacts; see the note at 1Co 11:25. The two covenants here referred to, are the one on Mount Sinai made with the Jews, and the other that which is made with the people of God in the gospel. The one resembles the condition of bondage in which Hagar and her son were; the other the condition of freedom in which Sarah and Isaac were.

The one from the Mount Sinai - Margin, "Sina."The Greek is "Sina,"though the word may be written either way.

Which gendereth to bondage - Which tends to produce bondage or servitude. That is, the laws are stern and severe; and the observance of them costly, and onerous like a state of bondage; see the note at Act 15:10.

Which is Agar - Which Hagar would appropriately represent. The condition of servitude produced by the Law had a strong resemblance to her condition as a slave.

Poole: Gal 4:24

Which things are an allegory: that is called an allegory, when one thing is learned out of another, or something is mystically signified and to be understood further than is expressed. The Scripture hath a peculiar kind of allegories, wherein one thing is signified by and under another thing. The thing here signifying, was Abraham’ s wife and concubine, Sarah and Hagar.

For these are the two covenants the apostle saith, these signified the two covenants, for that is the meaning of are: so as here we have one text more where the verb substantive is put for signifieth; and it will be hard to assign a reason why it should not be so interpreted in the institution of the Lord’ s supper, notwithstanding the papists’ and Lutherans’ so earnest contending to the contrary. The very word is here used, diayhkai , that is used in the institution of the Lord’ s supper. Here it is,

these are the two covenants or testaments; there, this is the new covenant. The apostle calls them two covenants, ( whereas they were but one), with reference to the time of their exhibition, and manner of their administration, in which they much differed. Nor must we understand the apostle as signifying to us by these words, that Moses wrote the history of Sarah and Hagar with such a design and intention; but only that that history is very applicable to the two covenants, and we shall find, Gal 4:27 , the apostle justifying this application from the authority of the prophet Isaiah. And hereto he complied with the general sense of the Jews, who judged that there was not only a literal, but a mystical sense also, of those histories of the patriarchs.

The one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar: the one covenant was that of the law delivered from mount Sinai, this was like Hagar; for as Hagar was herself a bondwoman, and so her child did partake of the condition of the mother, and Hagar bare a bondman or servant; so the law (which he calls a covenant, because of the stipulation of obedience from the people to the will of God revealed and declared) left those that were under it in a state of bondage or servitude.

Gill: Gal 4:24

Which things are an allegory,.... Or "are allegorized": so Sarah and Hagar were allegorized by Philo the Jew ^p, before they were by the apostle. Sarah he makes to signify virtue, and Hagar the whole circle of arts and sciences, which are, or should be, an handmaid to virtue; but these things respecting Hagar and Sarah, the bondwoman and the free, and their several offspring, are much better allegorized by the apostle here. An allegory is a way of speaking in which one thing is expressed by another, and is a continued metaphor; and the apostle's meaning is, that these things point at some other things; have another meaning in them, a mystical and spiritual one, besides the literal; and which the Jews call

מדרש, "Midrash", a name they give to the mystical and allegorical sense of Scripture, in which they greatly indulge themselves. An allegory is properly a fictitious way of speaking; but here it designs an accommodation of a real history, and matter of fact, to other cases and things, and seems to intend a type or figure; and the sense to be, that these things which were literally true of Hagar and Sarah, of Ishmael and Isaac, were types and figures of things to come; just as what befell the Israelites were types and figures of things that would be under the Gospel dispensation, 1Co 10:11.

for these are the two covenants, or "testaments"; that is, these women, Hagar and Sarah, signify, and are figures of the two covenants; not the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace. Hagar was no figure of the covenant of works, that was made and broke before she was born; besides, the covenant she was a figure of was made at Mount Sinai, whereas the covenant of works was made in paradise: moreover, the covenant of works was made with Adam, and all his posterity, but the covenant which Hagar signified was only made with the children of Israel; she represented Jerusalem, that then was with her children. Nor was Sarah a figure of the covenant of grace, for this was made long before she had a being, even from everlasting; but they were figures of the two administrations of one and the same covenant, which were to take place in the world successively; and which following one the other, are by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews called the first and the second, the old and the new covenants. Now these are the covenants or testaments, the old and the new, and the respective people under them, which were prefigured by these two women, and their offspring.

The one from the Mount Sinai; that is, one of these covenants, or one of the administrations of the covenant, one dispensation of it, which is the first, and now called old, because abolished, took its rise from Mount Sinai, was delivered there by God to Moses, in order to be communicated to the people of Israel, who were to be under that form of administration until the coming of the Messiah. And because the whole Mosaic economy was given to Moses on Mount Sinai, it is said to be from thence: hence, in Jewish writings, we read, times without number, of הלכה למשה מסיני, a rite, custom, constitution, or appointment given to Moses "from Mount Sinai", the same phrase as here. Sinai signifies "bushes", and has its name from the bushes which grew upon if, ^q; in one of which the Lord appeared to Moses; for Horeb and Sinai are one and the same mount; one signifies waste and desolate, the other bushy; as one part of the mountain was barren and desert, and the other covered with bushes and brambles; and may fitly represent the condition of such that are under the law.

Which gendereth to bondage; begets and brings persons into a state of bondage, induces on them a spirit of bondage to fear, and causes them to be all their lifetime subject to it; as even such were that were under the first covenant, or under the Old Testament dispensation:

which is Agar; or this is the covenant, the administration of it, which Hagar, the bondwoman, Sarah's servant, represented.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Gal 4:24

¹ tn Grk “which things are spoken about allegorically.” Paul is not saying the OT account is an allegory, but rather that he is constructing an allegory based on the OT account.

Geneva Bible: Gal 4:24

Which things are an allegory: for ^{( z )} these are the ^{( a )} two covenants; the one from the mount ^{( b )} Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

^{( z )} These represent and symbolize.

^{( a )} They are called two covenants, one of the Old Testament, and another of the New: which were not two indeed, but in respect of the times, and the diversity of the manner of ruling.

^{( b )} He makes mention of Sinai, because that covenant was made in that mountain, of which mountain Hagar was a symbol.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Gal 4:1-31

1 We were under the law till Christ came, as the heir is under the guardian till he be of age.

5 But Christ freed us from the law;

7 therefore we are servants no longer to it.

14 He remembers their good will to him, and his to them;

22 and shows that we are the sons of Abraham by the freewoman.

Combined Bible: Gal 4:24

color="#000000"> 24. Which things are an allegory.  

  

Allegories are not very convincing, but like pictures they visualize a matter. If Paul had not brought in advance indisputable arguments for the righteousness of faith over against the righteousness of works this allegory would do little good. Having first fortified his case with invincible arguments, he can afford to inject this allegory to add impressiveness and beauty to his presentation.  

  

VERSES 24, 25. For these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia.  

  

In this allegory Abraham represents God. Abraham had two sons, born respectively of Hagar and Sarah. The two women represent the two Testaments. The Old Testament is Mount Sinai, the bondwoman, Hagar. The Arabians call Mount Sinai Agar. It may be that the similarity of these two names gave Paul his idea for this allegory. As Hagar bore Abraham a son who was not an heir but a servant, so Sinai, the Law, the allegorical Hagar, bore God a carnal and servile people of the Law without promise. The Law has a promise but it is a conditional promise, depending upon whether people fulfill the Law.  

  

The Jews regarded the conditional promises of the Law as if they were unconditional. When the prophets foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jews stoned them as blasphemers of God. They never gave it any thought that there was a condition attached to the Law which reads: "If you keep the commandments it shall be well with thee."  

  

MHCC: Gal 4:21-27

The difference between believers who rested in Christ only, and those who trusted in the law, is explained by the histories of Isaac and Ishmael. These things are an allegory, wherein, beside the literal and historical sense of the words, the Spirit of God points out something further. Hagar and Sarah were apt emblems of the two different dispensations of the covenant. The heavenly Jerusalem, the true church from above, represented by Sarah, is in a state of freedom, and is the mother of all believers, who are born of the Holy Spirit. They were by regeneration and true faith, made a part of the true seed of Abraham, according to the promise made to him.

Matthew Henry: Gal 4:21-31

In these verses the apostle illustrates the difference between believers who rested in Christ only and those judaizers who trusted in the law, by a comparison taken from the story of Isaac and Ishmael. This he introduces in such a manner as was proper to strike and impress their minds, and to convince them of their great weakness in departing from the truth, and suffering themselves to be deprived of the liberty of the gospel: Tell me, says he, you that desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? He takes it for granted that they did hear the law, for among the Jews it was wont to be read in their public assemblies every sabbath day; and, since they were so very fond of being under it, he would have them duly to consider what is written therein (referring to what is recorded Gen. 16 and 21), for, if they would do this, they might soon see how little reason they had to trust in it. And here, 1. He sets before them the history itself (Gal 4:22, Gal 4:23): For it is written, Abraham had two sons, etc. Here he represents the different state and condition of these two sons of Abraham - that the one, Ishmael, was by a bond-maid, and the other, Isaac, by a free-woman; and that whereas the former was born after the flesh, or by the ordinary course of nature, the other was by promise, when in the course of nature there was no reason to expect that Sarah should have a son. 2. He acquaints them with the meaning and design of this history, or the use which he intended to make of it (Gal 4:24-27): These things, says he, are an allegory, wherein, besides the literal and historical sense of the words, the Spirit of God might design to signify something further to us, and that was, That these two, Agar and Sarah, are the two covenants, or were intended to typify and prefigure the two different dispensations of the covenant. The former, Agar, represented that which was given from mount Sinai, and which gendereth to bondage, which, though it was a dispensation of grace, yet, in comparison of the gospel state, was a dispensation of bondage, and became more so to the Jews, through their mistake of the design of it, and expecting to be justified by the works of it. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia (mount Sinai was then called Agar by the Arabians), and it answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children; that is, it justly represents the present state of the Jews, who, continuing in their infidelity and adhering to that covenant, are still in bondage with their children. But the other, Sarah, was intended to prefigure Jerusalem which is above, or the state of Christians under the new and better dispensation of the covenant, which is free both from the curse of the moral and the bondage of the ceremonial law, and is the mother of us all - a state into which all, both Jews and Gentiles, are admitted, upon their believing in Christ. And to this greater freedom and enlargement of the church under the gospel dispensation, which was typified by Sarah the mother of the promised seed, the apostle refers that of the prophet, Isa 54:1, where it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for the desolate hath many more children than she who hath a husband. 3. He applies the history thus explained to the present case (Gal 4:28); Now we, brethren, says he, as Isaac was, are the children of the promise. We Christians, who have accepted Christ, and rely upon him, and look for justification and salvation by him alone, as hereby we become the spiritual, though we are not the natural, seed of Abraham, so we are entitled to the promised inheritance and interested in the blessings of it. But lest these Christians should be stumbled at the opposition they might meet with from the Jews, who were so tenacious of their law as to be ready to persecute those who would not submit to it, he tells them that this was no more than what was pointed to in the type; for as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, they must expect it would be so now. But, for their comfort in this case, he desires them to consider what the scripture saith (Gen 21:10), Cast out the bond-woman and her son, for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman. Though the judaizers should persecute and hate them, yet the issue would be that Judaism would sink, and wither, and perish; but true Christianity should flourish and last for ever. And then, as a general inference from the whole of the sum of what he had said, he concludes (Gal 4:31), So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond-woman, but of the free.

Barclay: Gal 4:21-31

When we seek to interpret a passage like this we must remember that for the devout and scholarly Jew, and especially for the Rabbis, scripture had more than one meaning; and the literal meaning was often regarded as the least important. For the Jewish Rabbis a passage of scripture had four meanings. (i) Peshat, its simple or literal meaning. (ii) Remaz, its suggested meaning. (iii) Derush, the meaning deduced by investigation. (iv) Sod, the allegorical meaning. The first letters of these four words--P-R-D-S--are the consonants of the word Paradise--and when a man had succeeded in penetrating into these four different meanings he reached the joy of paradise!

It is to be noted that the summit of all meanings was the allegorical meaning. It therefore often happened that the Rabbis would take a simple bit of historical narrative from the Old Testament and read into it inner meanings which often appear to us fantastic but which were very convincing to the people of their day. Paul was a trained Rabbi; and that is what he is doing here. He takes the story involving Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Ishmael and Isaac (Gen 16-17, Gen 21 ), which in the Old Testament is a straightforward narrative and he allegorises it to illustrate his point.

The outline of the story is as follows: Abraham and Sarah were far advanced in years and Sarah had no child. She did what any wife would have done in those patriarchal times and sent Abraham in to her slave girl, Hagar, to see if she could bear a child on her behalf. Hagar had a son called Ishmael. In the meantime God had come and promised that Sarah would have a child, which was so difficult to believe that it appeared impossible to Abraham and Sarah; but in due time Isaac was born. That is to say, Ishmael was born of the ordinary human impulses of the flesh; Isaac was born because of God's promise; and Sarah was a free woman, while Hagar was a slave girl. From the beginning Hagar had been inclined to triumph over Sarah, because barrenness was a sore shame to a woman; there was an atmosphere charged with trouble. Later Sarah found Ishmael "mocking" (King James Version) Isaac--this Paul equates with persecution--and insisted that Hagar should be cast out, so that the child of the slave girl should not share the inheritance with her freeborn son. Further. Arabia was regarded as the land of slaves where the descendants of Hagar dwelt.

Paul takes that old story and allegorises it. Hagar stands for the old covenant of the law, made on Mount Sinai, which is in fact in Arabia, the land of Hagar's descendants. Hagar herself was a slave and all her children were born into slavery; and that covenant whose basis is the law turns men into slaves of the law. Hagar's child was born from merely human impulses; and legalism is the best that man can do. On the other hand Sarah stands for the new covenant in Jesus Christ, God's new way of dealing with men not by law but by grace. Her child was born free and according to God's promise--and all his descendants must be free. As the child of the slave girl persecuted the child of the free woman, the children of law now persecute the children of grace and promise. But as in the end the child of the slave girl was cast out and had no share in the inheritance, so in the end those who are legalists will be cast out from God and have no share in the inheritance of grace.

Strange as all this may seem to us, it enshrines one great truth. The man who makes law the principle of his life is in the position of a slave; whereas the man who makes grace the principle of his life is free, for, as a great saint put it, the Christian's maxim is, "Love God and do what you like." It is the power of that love, and not the constraint of law, that will keep us right; for love is always more powerful than law.

Constable: Gal 3:1--5:1

III. THEOLOGICAL AFFIRMATION OF SALVATION BY FAITH 3:1--4:31

Here begins the theological section of the epistle, which Paul led up to in his preceding historical account of his own conversion and calling culminating in his confrontation with Peter over justification.⁷⁹ Paul first vindicated the doctrine of justification by faith alone, and then he clarified it (ch. 4).

Constable: Gal 4:1-31

B. Clarification of the doctrine ch. 4

In chapter 3 the Jews' preoccupation with the Law of Moses was foremost in Paul's mind. In chapter 4 he reiterated his argument for the benefit of Gentiles for whom religious syncretism and pagan idolatry were primary concerns. Whereas in chapter 3 Paul dealt mainly with justification (cf. 3:20), in chapter 4 his emphasis was primarily on sanctification (cf. 4:3).

Constable: Gal 4:21-31

3. The biblical illustration 4:21-31

Paul interpreted allegorically (figuratively, NIV) features of the history of Abraham's two sons to convince his readers that they were in danger of joining the wrong branch of Abraham's family.

The apostle appears to have used the story of Abraham the way he did because this was a common rabbinic method that the Judaizers probably employed in their teaching in Galatia.¹⁵³ Paul used the same method on the false teachers but taught his readers truth rather than falsehood with it.

"We have one Old Testament story, but two complimentary interpretations of it. The first [vv. 22-27] defends the equation of existence hupo nomon [under law] with captivity and thus takes up a theme from what precedes. The second [vv. 28-30] makes a statement about the freedom of the believer in preparation for what is to come."¹⁵⁴

Constable: Gal 4:24-27

The allegorical interpretation 4:24-27

4:24 Paul then interpreted these events figuratively. Note that he said the story "contained" an allegory, not "was" an allegory. He acknowledged the historicity of the events. He saw in this story an illustration of the conflict between Judaism and Christianity, nomism and spirituality. He was calling allegory what we refer to as analogy.

"Since the kind of OT exegesis found in this passage is by no means generally characteristic of Paul, the natural inference is that there was a special reason for its use here. The reason is not far to seek: if the Judaizers in Galatia were using a similar kind of argument to persuade the Christians that sonship to Abraham entailed circumcision and observance of the law, it would be especially appropriate for Paul to turn his opponents' own weapons against them."¹⁵⁶

"The gospel is the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham that in him and his offspring all nations would be blessed (cf. 3:8, 16). The law, which was given later, was a parenthetical dispensation introduced by God for a limited purpose; its validity continued only until the promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ, and even while it was valid it did not modify the terms of the promise (cf. 3:17-25)."¹⁵⁷

4:25 Hagar represents the Mosaic Covenant made at Mount Sinai. Her descendants represent the Israelites who lived in bondage under the Law. Sarah, not mentioned in verse 25, represents the Abrahamic Covenant, and her descendants are free living under the promise.

The earliest identification of Mt. Sinai with Jebel Musa in the Sinai peninsula, the most popular probable site, comes from the writing of Egeria in the fourth century A.D. Perhaps in Paul's day the Sinai Peninsula was part of Arabia.¹⁵⁸ Another possibility is that the real Mt. Sinai was in ancient (and modern) Arabia, perhaps just east of the Gulf of Aqabah.

"Paul is apparently viewing Arabia as the land of Hagar's descendants and the land of slaves; it was not the holy land that God gave Israel."¹⁵⁹

4:26 Hagar also represents old Jerusalem, enslaved under Rome and the Mosaic Law, which Paul did not mention in verse 26. Sarah represents the heavenly city of Jerusalem, the final destiny of departed believers, which is free. She is also the mother of all true believers.

The main features in this analogy are as follows.

Hagar is the bond women Sarah is the free woman

Ishmael was born naturally Isaac was born supernaturally

The old covenant The new covenant

The earthly Jerusalem The heavenly Jerusalem

Judaism Christianity¹⁶⁰

4:27 The quotation from Isaiah 54:1 predicted that Israel, which was comparatively barren before the Babylonian exile, would enjoy numerous children in the future. This is probably a reference to the blessings of the millennial kingdom. Paul applied this prophecy to Sarah. She would have greater blessing and more children in the future than in the past, children of the promises, namely all true believers including Christians.

College: Gal 4:1-31

GALATIANS 4

3. The Full Rights of the Children (4:1-7)

¹ What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate. ² He is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. ³ So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world. ⁴ But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, ⁵ to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. ⁶ Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, " Abba , ^a Father." ⁷ So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

^a 6 Aramaic for Father

4:1 What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child,

Now the analogy changes slightly. The law has been depicted as a prison-warden (3:23) and a slave-attendant; now the law is viewed as guardian-trustee who is responsible for a little child until the child comes of age. The child (Greek nhvpio" , nçpios ) is here an infant, totally incapable of taking care of himself.

he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate.

Plato's dialogue between Socrates and Lysis (cf. Gal 3:24) continues in this vein:

Socrates: Why do they maintain you all day long in constant servitude to somebody, so that, in a word, you do hardly a single thing that you desire? And thus, it would seem, you get no advantage from all your great possessions - nay, anyone else controls them rather than you - nor from your own person, though so well-born, which is also shepherded and managed by another; while you Lysis, control nobody, and do nothing that you desire.

Lysis: It is because I am not yet of age, Socrates.

4:2 He is subject to guardians and trustees

By Roman law until the heir came of age at fourteen, he was under a tutor named by the deceased father in his will. Then until the heir became twenty-five, he was under a curator appointed by the leader of the city. While these Latin terms do not correspond exactly with "guardian" (ejpitrovpo" , epitropos ) and "trustees" (oijkonovmo" , oikonomos ), they typify the situation of the underage heir in that society.

until the time set by his father.

While Roman law set the age at fourteen, the father had the right to adjust the age at which the heir would receive full legal rights. Bruce quotes from the will of a man named Eudaemon who lived in Oxyrhynchus, dated A.D. 126: "If I die before the said Horus and Eudaemon have completed twenty years, their brother Thonis and their maternal grandfather Harpaesis, also called Horus, son of Thonis, shall be guardian ( epitropos ) of each of them until he completes twenty years."

4:3 So also, when we were children, we were in slavery

When Paul says "we" he speaks of the Jewish nation among whom he grew up. Later, in verses 8 and 9 he will describe the similar situation of the pagan world.

under the basic principles of the world.

The "basic principles" (stoicei'a , stoicheia ) originally meant "things in a row." In this sense it could mean the ABC's of the alphabet, the basic teachings of a given subject (as in the "ABC's of military strategy"), or the physical elements of the world (fire, air, water, earth). A couple of centuries after Paul the word was used in reference to some sort of mystic powers in the heavens, similar to the forces of the Zodiac. As the word is used here in this context, it refers to "rudimentary religious teachings" possessed by all the human race, both Jew and Gentile.

4:4 But when the time had fully come,

When Paul points to a time that had "fully come," he mixes two images. The time had "fully come" for infant heirs to come of age (v. 2), but it was also a time when God's people as mere slaves were granted adoption into the family (v. 5).

Paul does not say what it was that marked this point in world history as the ripe moment for the incarnation of God's Son. It is perhaps hazardous to attempt to fathom the reasons for God's time-table, but several facts of history stand out. The Romans had made this moment uniquely ready by building a network of roads and establishing a stable government. Never before had travel been so easy and safe; not again for another 1500 years would it be so. The Greeks made their contribution through the universality of their language and the failure of their religion. It was an age of opportunity in communication, but an age when the traditional faiths had little to communicate. The Jews had made this moment in time ripe for the birth of the church by establishing synagogues throughout the known world, and by translating the Septuagint, the O.T. Scripture in Greek. When pioneer evangelists like Paul came to a new town, their gospel beachhead was the synagogue, where word of the true God and his promised Messiah was read every Sabbath. Perhaps all this was coincidence, but more likely it was the sovereign hand of God preparing the world so that Jesus would come "when the time had fully come."

God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law,

Nothing in the history of the world had been as important as this sublime event. The Son who had shared God's glory from the beginning (John 17:5) would now empty himself (Phil 2:7) and become obedient to the Father's sending. Sent forth (ejxapostevllw , exapostellô ) into the world, Jesus became the "apostle" (ajpovstolo" , apostolos ) to do the Father's will (Heb 3:1).

Throughout the Old Testament, God had often sent angels to warn or assist his people. These heavenly creatures suddenly appeared and suddenly left. They did not stay to experience or participate in humanity. But Jesus did not just suddenly materialize into the Galilean countryside one day; by his humble human birth he took on real human flesh. Furthermore, Jesus put himself in submission to the same laws that bound all men. He fully entered the human predicament; his incarnation was complete.

4:5 to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.

Under the law the human race was bound as slaves and confined as incompetent children. The legal doom of guilt hung over our head. But Jesus entered the picture to "redeem" us, to "legally buy us out" (ejxagoravzw , exagorazô ) of our bondage. (See the same word in 3:13, where Christ "redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.")

4:6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts,

Just as God sent forth (ejxapevsteilen , exapesteilen ) his Son into the world (v. 4), God also has sent forth ( exapesteilen ) the Spirit into our hearts. The basis of our having the Spirit within us is our sonship.

the Spirit who calls out, " Abba , Father."

The Jews sometimes prayed in the synagogue to "our Father," using a more formal expression. But never did they use Abba , a child's word for father used only in the affectionate intimacy of the family circle. "So far as can be ascertained, Jesus was unique in applying this designation to God."

In the agony of Gethsemane the cry from the lips of Jesus was " Abba , Father" (Mark 14:36). The only other uses of the term Abba in the New Testament are Romans 8:15 and this verse in Galatians. It is significant that in both of Paul's uses the context is that of being adopted into the family of God, and the verb "cry out" (kravzw , krazô ) is used. The Romans passage especially emphasizes that we are not adopted into a spirit of slavery and fear, but into a spirit of sonship. In our utter extremity we who are God's children can call with affectionate intimacy to our Father for help.

4:7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son;

Because God sent his Son and his Spirit in a wonderful act of grace, we are welcomed into the heavenly family. Though we deserve to be no more than lowly slaves (or even less!), we are sons. This truth has special implications for the Galatians and all other legalists. Mature faith is not the faith that adheres the most strictly to the letter of the law and the rigors of the regulations. Mature faith is the faith that loves God as a Father, the faith that follows in his steps as a son.

and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

As in the parallel in Romans 8:15-17, those who are adopted into the family become heirs of the family inheritance. By faith we become heirs of the promise made to Abraham, and by sharing the Spirit we become joint-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17).

4. The Folly of Turning Back (4:8-11)

⁸ Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. ⁹ But now that you know God -- or rather are known by God -- how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? ¹⁰ You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! ¹¹ I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

4:8 Formerly, when you did not know God,

Having addressed the Jewish Christians in verse 3, Paul now turns his attention to the Gentile Christians. In their past they worshiped in the darkness of ignorance. Though they were well meaning, they were idolaters who did not know the true God. Their previous plight is well described by Paul in Ephesians 2:11-12.

you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods.

As a consequence of their darkened ignorance they were formerly "slaves," just as the Jews had been slaves. The difference is that while the Jews were enslaved to the written code of the Law, the Gentiles were enslaved to idols. These idols were not "gods" with power to act; they were not even alive. Isaiah mocked such people who carved a god out of one end of a log and burned the other end to bake bread (Isa 44:9-20). Jeremiah said (10:5) of the idols of the nations:

Like a scarecrow in a melon patch,

their idols cannot speak;

they must be carried

because they cannot walk.

Do not fear them;

they can do no harm

nor can they do any good.

4:9 But now that you know God-or rather are known by God-

But in Christ these Gentiles came to know the one true God and find salvation in his grace. Paul is quick to point out, however, that knowing God is not a one-way street. It is not as if we earn salvation by learning or knowing certain mystic secrets, as the Gnostics were later to teach. We obtain salvation when we are introduced to God, and when he acknowledges us. It is the last part, being known by God, that is really the most crucial.

While the two Greeks words for "know" in v. 8 and v. 9 are synonyms meaning much the same thing, there is still a shade of difference in their meaning. In v. 8 the word "know" reflects the Greek word oida ( oida ), which sometimes means merely that a fact has come within the scope of someone's perception. On the other hand the word used in v. 9 is ginwvskw (ginôskô ), which usually goes beyond mental perception to describe the forming of a relationship with someone through actual involvement with that person. The two verses set in juxtaposition seem to say this: "You previously did not even know who God is, but in Christ you actually met God and entered an intimate relationship with him."

how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?

Having left the dark ignorance of idolatry, these Gentile Christians were wanting to "turn back." But notice something quite surprising here: when these people "turn back," it is not to worship idols again. In this context they "turn back" when they submit to weak and miserable legalism! From the Christian perspective, there is little difference between the pagan and the Jew. Both are on the same level, enslaved to "weak and miserable principles."

These principles (Greek stoicei'a , stoicheia ) are the very same things that held God's children captive in v. 3. They are called "weak" (ajsqenh' , asthenç , "sickly") and "miserable" (ptwcav , ptôcha , "impoverished") because they are impotent to produce salvation.

Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?

English translations mask the intensity of Paul's question, which originally had threefold emphasis on the idea "again." Note the emphasis in this literal translation: "How can you return AGAIN to the puny, poor principles, to which AGAIN you AGAIN want to be enslaved?"

The Galatian Christians, especially the former Gentile idolaters among them, apparently thought they would be stepping up to the next level above Christ when they accepted circumcision and other requirements of the law. In fact, Paul told them, they were reverting right back to where they started!

4:10 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years!

Keeping a sacred calendar (formerly the pagan one, now the Jewish) was evidence that these people were, in fact, reverting to their old ways. What was to be gained by observing special days (especially the Sabbath) and months (the new moons of Num 28:11-15) and seasons (annual feasts such as Tabernacles, Passover, and Pentecost) and years (such as the Sabbath year and the year of Jubilee)? Would God be impressed by their attention to detail in the old law? Would they earn more of God's favor?

It should be noted that commentators who take the "principles" ( stoicheia ) as "elemental spirits" (v. 9) often see in this verse some reference to the Zodiac. Noticing a similarity to the "seasons and days and years" marked off by the stars, planets, sun and moon, they read into this passage some kind of misguided dependence on astrology. The clear context of Paul's arguments, however, clearly deals with the law.

4:11 I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Just as in 2:2, if Paul's converts fall prey to legalism, then his efforts have been wasted. In that passage, as well as in the present verse, the literal translation is "lest somehow in vain" he ran or toiled. Since Paul was thoroughly familiar with the Old Testament, he may have been consciously reproducing the thought of Isaiah, "I have labored to no purpose; I have spent my strength in vain and for nothing" (49:4).

F. ARGUMENT SIX: PAUL'S

PERSONAL PLEA (4:12-20)

1. Paul's Former Welcome (4:12-16)

¹² I plead with you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. ¹³ As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. ¹⁴ Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. ¹⁵ What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. ¹⁶ Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

4:12 I plead with you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you.

This is the most personal, earnestly emotional section of Paul's letter. His urgent tone is reflected in the word "plead" (also translated "beseech" or "beg"). Since Paul had so completely given his heart to them, why can they not return the favor to Paul? In order to reach the Galatian people, Paul crossed cultural and religious barriers that were virtually unthinkable for a person who had grown up as a Jew. But now, ironically, his converts had cut themselves off from Paul by re-erecting those same barriers and standing at the very point from which Paul had originally come!

You have done me no wrong.

In 2 Cor 7:2 Paul assured the Corinthians he had done them no wrong; here he says the same of the Galatians toward himself. There was no need for either side to feel alienated or suspicious. They were friends! They were brothers!

4:13 As you know, it was because of an illness

The exact nature of Paul's illness has excited a good deal of speculation. Possible clues in this text and elsewhere in the New Testament suggest several possible ailments. (1) Sir William Ramsay, who did important pioneer archaeological work concerning Paul's missionary journeys, believed the ailment was malaria. Paul could have contracted the disease in the lowlands of Pamphylia (Acts 13:13), causing John Mark to flee back to Jerusalem, and Paul himself to seek relief and recovery in the higher altitude of Pisidian Antioch. This proposal has in its favor that it explains how Paul's ailment could be the reason that he had come to Galatia to preach (v. 13b). (2) Verse 14, on the other hand suggests that the ailment was epilepsy. The literal translation of "treat me with scorn" is "spit out at." This unfriendly gesture was a common way to ward off the effects of the evil eye or the evil spirit thought to be responsible for strange behavior such as epilepsy. (3) Verse 15 may suggest that the ailment was eye disease. It has been suggested that Paul suffered scarring from his eye scales in Acts 9:18, and that this was perhaps the reason he failed to recognize the high priest in Acts 23:5. Even apart from Paul's unusual experiences, eye disease was a common problem in the Roman world. Perhaps it was sympathy for Paul's red, watering eyes that caused the Galatians to treat him so kindly at first. (4) Another possibility is the physical effects of the stoning in Lystra (Acts 14:19) or other instances of persecution (2 Cor 11:23-27).

No final answer can be given to the question of Paul's ailment. It may or may not be associated with his "thorn in the flesh" (2 Cor 12:7) which the Lord gave him to keep him from becoming conceited. The point to remember in the context of Galatians is that Paul came to them a sick man, one they could have treated with disdain, but they welcomed him into their hearts.

that I first preached the gospel to you.

The literal translation of this clause, "I preached to you the former time," has led some to believe that at the time of this epistle Paul had been in Galatia exactly twice. Following the North Galatian theory, this would have been Acts 16:6 and 18:23. In line with the South Galatian theory, both could have been on the first journey, Acts 13:14ff. and 14:21. It is not necessary, however, to take the words so literally. By New Testament times the expression "the former time" (toÉ provteron , to proteron ) had come to be used in a broader sense to mean simply "earlier."

4:14 Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn.

While the Corinthians said "his bodily presence is weak (or sickly)," the Galatians were gracious enough to overlook what was apparently obnoxious and offensive in Paul. His condition could rightly have been a "trial" to them, whatever the exact nature of the ailment. While the first reaction would have been to avoid him as disgusting or shun him as demon-possessed, the Galatians opened their hearts. They did not treat him with contempt (Greek ejxouqenevw , exoutheneô , "despise") or with scorn (Greek ejkptuvw , ekptyô , "spit out at").

Instead you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself.

Although people often cannot get past the negative first impression of disease or deformity, the Galatians accorded Paul a warm welcome. Recognizing him to be a messenger of God, they treated him as if he were an angel - even as if he were Jesus himself. All of this is being recounted by Paul in a desperate attempt to restore the warm friendship and trust that previously existed between them.

4:15 What has happened to all your joy?

What had changed? When Paul first came to them they rejoiced and "congratulated themselves that this messenger of God had come with such good news." The Greek word for "joy" (makarismov" , makarismos ) is a form of the word "blessed" (makavrio" , makarios ) used by Jesus in the Beatitudes. It depicts a state of joy and blessedness for which one is to be congratulated. Earlier, then, there were congratulations all around; now there is stony silence.

I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me.

"I will take the witness stand," said Paul, to testify officially and formally what their state of mind had been. They felt such love for Paul that they would have given him anything - even their very eyes. (Whether this identifies the nature of Paul's illness is by no means certain.) Most likely this figure of speech identifies what is very precious to any person (cf. Matt 5:29) and was used by Paul to show the extreme degree of their love.

True friends will make any sacrifice. The ancient writer Lucian told this story of two Scythian friends: In order to ransom his friend Amizoces from captivity, Dandamis sacrificed his eyes. When Amizoces was set free he put out his own eyes, because he could not bear to see his friend blind.

4:16 Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Again, what had changed? What had now made Paul their enemy? The problem, as the Galatian Christians well knew, was that they had been won over by certain legalists who had followed Paul to Galatia. The same situation had happened in Antioch (Acts 15:1) and in Corinth (2 Cor 12:11-19).

2. Paul's Present Pains (4:17-20)

¹⁷ Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you [from us], so that you may be zealous for them. ¹⁸ It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. ¹⁹ My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, ²⁰ how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!

4:17 Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good.

These "Johnny-come-lately" legalists had made an all out effort to win the following of the Galatians. To "be zealous" (zhlovw , zçloô ) meant "to be stirred, to be enthusiastic" toward someone. It meant "to admire or commend someone" in either a good sense or a bad sense, depending on the ulterior motives. For this reason the word is sometimes translated "be zealous" and other times is translated "be jealous." The key to understanding the word lies in the heart - good or bad - of the zealous/jealous person.

What they want is to alienate you [from us], so that you may be zealous for them.

Just like a modern-day cult, the Galatian legalists used isolation from the greater Christian community as their weapon. They gushed with admiration and attention to the young Christians in Galatia, so that they would receive admiration in return. Note how different this attitude is from Paul's desire that his converts not say, "I follow Paul" (1 Cor 1:12).

4:18 It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good,

It can be good or bad to be "stirred with enthusiasm." Paul himself told the Corinthians, "I am zealous for you with a godly zeal" (2 Cor 11:2). Christ was consumed with "zeal" for his Father's house (John 2:17). Christians are to have zeal for others (2 Cor 9:2), for the right (1 Pet 3:13), and for good works (Titus 2:14). In the Greek translation of the O.T. this is the same word used when God is "jealous" for his people (Exod 20:5).

and to be so always and not just when I am with you.

There is a quiet but stinging rebuke in these words. The Galatians had earlier felt "zealous" for Paul, and in the good sense of the word this was fine. But now that Paul's back was turned, their zeal was redirected to the legalists and was distorted by their corrupt motives.

4:19 My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth

Paul's births pains may be understood in two different ways. (1) Since the Galatians had fallen back into relying on the "weak and miserable principles" of the law (v. 9), it was necessary to go through the travail of winning their loyalty to Christ all over again. (2) Since they were making no progress in the inner recreation of the new self (Eph 4:22-24), the anguish and struggle of the process had been shifted to Paul. At issue is whether the Galatians had ceased to be Christians at all, or had merely stalled out in their growth. Either way, it was most unfair that the burden was shifted back to only Paul.

until Christ is formed in you,

The ultimate goal of salvation is not just free passage to heaven for sinful, unregenerate souls. Salvation is the entire healing process, whereby the ruined and lost creature is called back to God and recreated into the image of his Creator (Eph 4:24). This reformation can only happen when Christ dwells in our hearts by faith (Eph 3:17) and we are led by his spirit (Rom 8:9). William Temple offered the classic illustration of this point when he said,

It is no good giving me a play like Hamlet or King Lear and telling me to write a play like that. Shakespeare could do it; I can't. And it is no good showing me a life like that of Jesus and telling me to live a life like that. Jesus could do it; I can't. But if the genius of Shakespeare could come and live in me, then I could write plays like that. And if the Spirit of Jesus could come and live in me, I could live a life like that.

4:20 how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone,

Paul realized all too well how cold and argumentative his words might seem. Though some people criticized Paul's weak personal appearance in contrast with his epistles (2 Cor 10:10), Paul would gladly have assumed a position of weakness just to be with them. Perhaps if they could meet eye to eye, and heart to heart, Paul could make them understand! Present circumstances (unknown to us today), however, made it impossible for Paul to go to Galatia and appeal to them in person.

because I am perplexed about you!

The word "perplexed" (ajporou'mai , aporoumai ) means literally "unable to go in any direction; having nowhere to turn." Translators have caught the tone of Paul's frustration by saying, "I honestly don't know how to deal with you" (Phillips) and "I am at my wits' end about you!" (Moffatt).

G. ARGUMENT SEVEN:

ALLEGORY OF HAGAR & SARAH (4:21-31)

²¹ Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? ²² For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. ²³ His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. ²⁴ These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. ²⁵ Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. ²⁶ But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. ²⁷ For it is written:

"Be glad, O barren woman, who bears no children;

break forth and cry aloud, you who have no labor pains;

because more are the children of the desolate woman

than of her who has a husband." ^a

²⁸ Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. ²⁹ At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. ³⁰ But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." ^{b 31} Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

^a 27 Isaiah 54:1 ^b 30 Gen. 21:10

4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

After all the arguments from both O.T. law and everyday life, Paul now prepares to make his final appeal. He will return to Scripture one last time and make an allegorical interpretation of the Genesis account of Hagar and Sarah and the births of their sons. The legalists in Galatia who are so eager to keep the law should listen very closely to this lesson from the law.

The allegorical method was popular in ancient times, and included among its frequent practitioners were Plato, various Stoics, Philo, and the Christian writer Origen. While the allegory as a form of argument is not as persuasive to modern minds, we should not disdain its value for other cultures. (We who climax our sermons with "shaggy dog" stories to evoke an emotional response should not be hasty to criticize Paul's carefully reasoned use of this allegory!)

4:22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons,

At the age of 86 Abraham became the father of Ishmael (Gen 16:16) and at the age of 100 he became the father of Isaac (Gen 21:5).

one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.

When Sarah had finally given up on ever bearing a child for Abraham, she reasoned that her handmaiden Hagar could serve as surrogate mother in her place (Gen 16:2). This was apparently an accepted practice in their culture and was repeated by Rachel and Jacob (Gen 30:3). When Hagar presented Abraham a son, succeeding where her mistress had failed, she quickly felt superior to Sarah and began to despise her. The jealous wife and the concubine came to have such bitter relations that only an intervention of the Lord kept Hagar and the baby from being driven out (Gen 16:4-9). Sixteen years later, when Isaac had been born and was being weaned, tempers again flared (Gen 21:8-10). This time there was no reconciliation; Hagar and her teenaged son were cast out.

4:23 His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way;

This verse is the key to the validity of Paul's allegory. Unlike many allegories where the associated ideas are purely arbitrary, there is a logical connection here between the ancient story and the argument at hand. Ishmael, "born in the ordinary way" (literally, "born according to flesh"), logically symbolizes all those who try to make it on their own. His birth "according to flesh" was not a sinful thing, it was merely an inadequate thing in contrast to the power of God.

but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

Isaac, on the other hand, was born "through promise." His birth was so far removed from normal processes that some Jewish theologians even construed it to be a virgin birth. Notice how little mention of Abraham is made when the promised son is born in Gen 21:1-2, "Now the LORD was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did for Sarah what he had promised. Sarah became pregnant and bore a son. . . ." Isaac, "born as the result of a promise," logically symbolizes all those who cannot make it on their own and must rely on God's gracious promises.

4:24 These things may be taken figuratively,

Literally, "which things are being allegorized" (ajllhgorouvmena , allçgoroumena ). It is Paul's own statement that this is an allegory. He has perhaps chosen this form of expression, much in the same way a preacher may choose an illustration, for its value in reaching someone's heart or will. Like any illustration, it does not of itself prove anything; rather, it helps to illustrate the truthfulness of what has already been shown to be true.

Allegorizing can easily be distorted and abused. Philo, a Jewish philosopher living in Alexandria, made this his primary approach to Scripture. In his treatment of the creation in Genesis, for instance, "light" is knowledge, the "earth" is sense-perception, etc. Three centuries later in the same city, the Christian theologian Origen employed a similar approach to Scripture. Beneath the surface "literal" meaning was a deeper "moral" meaning, while even deeper than that was the spiritual "allegorical" meaning which Origen preferred. What Paul is doing with this verse is a different matter, however. His associations are logical, not arbitrary, and his argument has already been proven by other means.

for the women represent two covenants.

The two women and the two sons they bore can logically represent two great covenants of Scripture. One covenant is that of Moses; the other covenant is that of Abraham, the promise which found fulfillment in Christ. On the one side are the legalists - those who lack faith in God and try to make it on their own. On the other side are the believers - those who know they cannot make it on their own and put all their trust in God. In the following chart the items which are not specifically mentioned in Scripture will be placed in parenthesis:

LEGALISTS BELIEVERS (Ishmael) Isaac Born in ordinary way Born as result of promise Mother - Hagar Mother - (Sarah) Slave Free Mt. Sinai (Mt. Zion) Present Jerusalem Jerusalem Above Is in slavery Is free Born for slavery Born for freedom Persecutor Persecuted Born in ordinary way Born by power of Spirit Is cast out Is made heir It is especially interesting that in the application of this allegory to Paul's audience, the original roles have been reversed. The Gentile children of Ishmael are free in Christ, while the Jewish children of Isaac are in bondage through the Law. While the teachers of legalism in Galatia may have been arguing that Jews are free and Gentiles are cast out, Paul shows that exactly the opposite is true.

One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.

Paul does not just arbitrarily assign the law-keepers on the wrong side. They belong on the side of Hagar and Ishmael because they stand for man-made works. The Judaizers have abandoned the place of Abraham (the father of faith) and Isaac (the product of faith). By their choice of Mt. Sinai over Mt. Zion they have cast their lot as children of Hagar, born to be slaves.

4:25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia

Paul's statement here has occasioned a number of interpretative positions, as listed by Bruce. (1) The text has been corrupted, and the original read, "Now Sinai is a mountain in Arabia." But why would Paul bother to teach such an obvious lesson in geography? (2) The name Hagar is somehow to be connected with the Semitic word for "rock" or "crag" (Heb. hagar , Aram. hagra , Arab. hagar ). But a rock is not a mountain, and "Hagar" is certainly not the name for that particular mountain where Moses received the Law. (3) The reference is to el-Hegra , 200 miles north of Medina. But this has little connection with the argument Paul is making. (4) Much more likely is that Paul is simply stating the obvious conclusion to be drawn from his allegory thus far. Hagar and her do-it-yourself descendants in Galatia represent the mountain where the covenant of law was given.

and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.

For Paul the center of legalism was Jerusalem, the city where he had studied at the feet of Gamaliel. More than locations in geography, however, Jerusalem represented an attitude, a state of mind, a way of approach to God. All those who were children of this Jerusalem were enslaved under the Law, as Paul had earlier proved (3:23-4:9).

4:26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

The concept of the heavenly Jerusalem is found later in two other books of the New Testament. Hebrews 12:22 speaks of "the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God," which is located at "Mount Zion." Abraham had faithfully looked forward to this city, "with foundations, whose architect and builder is God" (Heb 11:10). Revelation speaks of "the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from God" (3:12; 21:2, 10ff.). A preview of this concept can be found in the Septuagint version of Psalm 87:5 (LXX 86:5), "'Zion is my mother,' a man will say."

Thus linked with Abraham and people of faith from all generations, the believer lays claim to a heavenly heritage. Believers in Christ belong to the heavenly city and it will be their destiny.

4:27 For it is written: "Be glad, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have no labor pains;

At this point Paul returns to the drama of Hagar and Sarah. While the lowly handmaiden came to gloat in her fertility, the barren wife felt all the more keenly her childless plight. But when the Lord finally stepped in to fulfill his promises, the aged Sarah brought forth a son. Sarah's victory became a frequent theme of the Old Testament, and Isaiah had this in mind when he predicted that the restored Jerusalem would have greater glory that her pre-exile counterpart (Isa 54:1-8). It is the beginning of Isaiah's cry of triumph for the holy city which Paul is quoting at this point in Galatians.

because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband."

It was true for Sarah that her descendants through Isaac came to be more numerous that the descendants of Ishmael. It was true for Isaiah that the restored city of Jerusalem eventually regained, and in some ways surpassed, the size and glory of the original city. But most of all it is true for Paul that ushering the Gentile Christians into the family of God will bring a multitude which no man can count around the throne of God. The size and glory of the church easily surpasses the Jewish kingdom(s) at any point in their history.

4:28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.

It is logical and reasonable to say that Christians belong with Isaac, while legalists belong with Ishmael. We who know we cannot earn salvation by our own works must depend upon God's promise of salvation by grace through faith. Like Abraham, we walk by faith; like Isaac, our very sonship is a product of God's promise.

4:29 At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.

It does not escape Paul's notice that another parallel can be drawn in the analogy between Ishmael/Isaac and legalists/believers: the ordinary son persecutes the Spirit-born son. When baby Isaac had reached the end of his infancy, at the celebration in Isaac's honor the teenaged Ishmael began mocking and taunting his little half-brother (Gen 21:8-10). In a similar way, when God's grace-children come of age and enjoy freedom in Christ, it is simply more than their older legalist brethren can stand!

To say that God's grace-children are "born by the power of the Spirit" is a reminder of the beginning of Paul's arguments in 3:2-5. It was by faith, not by works of law, that the Galatians received the Holy Spirit. Even more fundamental than this, however, is the truth that the Spirit is the procreating power who produces spiritual birth. As Jesus told Nicodemus, a man must be "born of water and the Spirit" to enter God's kingdom (John 3:5). Paul echoed this same truth when he spoke of "rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).

4:30 But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son,

Now Paul comes to the bottom line. Especially for those in Galatia who were so enamored with the Old Testament: what does that Scripture say? The slave woman and her son must go. This was a drastic action, apparently contrary to social custom and Abraham's own preferences (Gen 21:11), but that was the final outcome nevertheless.

for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."

The code of Hammurabi (paragraph 170) required that "the children of the wife shall divide the property of the father's house equally with the sons of the bondmaid; the son and heir, the son of the wife, shall choose a share (first) and take it."

Bruce notes here "a basic gospel truth: legal bondage and spiritual freedom cannot coexist."

4:31 Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

"Therefore" brings us to a final summing up of the evidence. Which side - legalists or believers - stands with Ishmael in do-it-yourself works, slavery to law, and persecuting their innocent brothers? And which side - legalists or believers - stands with Isaac in spiritual birth through God's promise, freedom in Christ, and suffering unjust persecution from their brothers? Clearly the logical conclusion is that the legalists are rightly classed with Ishmael and are cast out; the believing Gentiles are rightly classed with Isaac and will inherit the blessings of freedom.

A similar point was established in Rom 9:7-9, that through Isaac (not through Ishmael) the true descendants of Abraham will be reckoned. "It is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring."

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: Gal 4:24

Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.

Lapide: Gal 4:1-31

CHAPTER 4

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. He continues the argument of the preceding chapter that the Jews, like children and slaves, were under the Jewish law as a pædagague, while Christians, as sons of full age, were led, not by the law, but by the Spirit of adoption, whereby they cry, "Abba, Father," and that it is, therefore, unworthy of them to return to the weak and beggarly elements of the law.

ii. He Observes (ver. 13) on the eagerness with which the Galatians had formerly embraced his preaching, that he may shame them for so lightly departing from it.

iii. He introduces (ver. 21) a new argument from an allegory drawn from Abraham's history. His wife Sarah, a "free woman," bore him Isaac as his son and heir, by whom were represented Christians, the free-born sons of God, free from the bondage of the law, and in due time heirs of Abraham's blessing. His bondwoman Hagar bore him Ishmael, who was cast out, and who represented the Judaisers, to be shut out from the blessing promised by God to Abraham.

Ver. 1. — Now I say. This is closely connected with vers. 24 and 25 of the preceding chapter, where it was said that "the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, but after that faith is come we are no longer under a schoolmaster." He proceeds to prove this at greater length, and begins with the example of a child who is under tutors.

The heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant. An infant, as the Greek word is, who has not yet attained to years of discretion, inasmuch as he is under a tutor and a pædagogue, and cannot exercise the right of dominion over his property, is in the position of a slave rather than a lord, nay, he is subject to a slave, viz., his pædagogue, and is under tutors and governors.

Ver. 2. — Governors. Stewards who administer his property.

Until the time appointed. The prescribed day when the power of the tutor came to an end, i.e., the date when the heir was twenty five years of age, which in many places is the age of majority.

Ver. 3. — Even so we. That is the Jews, whom he so describes in chap. iii. 25.

When we were children. Like boys untaught in the knowledge, and therefore in the love of God and His righteousness.

Under the elements of the world. 1. Serving the letter of the Old Law. For the law, as being imperfect, was first given to the world, i.e., to the Jews, and through the Jews to all nations, to teach them the rudiments of faith and piety. But the Gospel, succeeding the law, teaches their perfection. As Justinian calls his Institutes the "elements of the law," and as we speak of the elements of grammar, philosophy, and music, so here the Apostle speaks of the law as elementary. As boys, says Anselm, learn the elements, and their conjunction, but do not understand the words and sentences composed from them until they proceed to higher branches of learning, to which they can only attain by first learning the elements, so the Jews had the elements in their ceremonies, of which they did not understand the meaning, until by these elements, as their elevators, they come to the faith of Christ.

S. Paul calls the men of the world by the name of the world. The reference is first to the Jews, then, by metonymy, to all men. God willed to open, in one corner of the world a school, where He might teach men the rudiments of faith and piety, until He should open everywhere schools where they were most learnedly taught.

2. More properly and naturally the elements of the world are the days, months, times, and years of verse 10. These he calls elements byan allusion to Gen. i., where it is said that God created the elements of the world in seven days, and then rested on the seventh day, and instituted the Sabbath as a memorial among the Jews of His creative rest. The days are thus called elements, because in them the elements were created, and their creation represented by metonymy on the Sabbath. Or they may be so called because time governs the world and all in it, as the generation, corruption, and succession of things. Accordingly, in grateful recollection of God's providence, disposing by sun and moon the succession of the seasons and of day and night, He willed that Sabbaths, new moons, and other days should be observed by the Jews, that they might continually recognise God as the Creator and Preserver of all things, through the instrumentality of these stated feasts, till, being better taught by the Gospel, they should worship God in spirit and in truth.

Erasmus, however, thinks that the world here by catachresis stands for whatever has the nature of visible and transitory things, such as the ceremonies of the Old Law, which, in Col 2:20, he calls "the rudiments of the world." But this is not the usual meaning of the word with the Apostle, nor is it the meaning in Col 2:20, as I will prove when I come to comment on it. Cf. also infra, notes on verse 9.

We were in bondage. Theophylact explains this from the analogy of the child under tutors. As this child differs nothing from a slave, so, when we were children in the knowledge of Christ and the love of God, we were, like slaves, under the aforesaid elements of the world, and under the tutorship of the Old Law.

Ver. 4. — But when the fulness of the time was come. When the time fixed beforehand for the end of the law and the beginning of the Gospel was fully come, we were transferred from the servitude of the law to the freedom of sonship. S. Bernard ( Serm. 1 de Adventu ) explains the passage somewhat differently: " The fulness and abundance of temporal things had brought about forgetfulness and famine of eternal things. It was at the moment when temporal things held sway that eternal things opportunely arrived." But this is a symbolical rather than literal explanation. Literally, the fulness of time is not the abundance of temporal things, but the full completion of the predetermined time.

God sent forth His Son, as His legate or Apostle, with full instructions to act on His behalf. He sent His Son, not by change of place, as though He left heaven and arrived at earth; but the Son, remaining where He was, in heaven and on earth, took a new role, viz., that of a Human Ambassador from God to man.

Made of a woman. Woman here denotes, not corruption, but the female sex, and applies as well to a virgin as to another woman. Made of a woman denotes conception without a male, from the sole substance of the mother. From this it clearly follows that Christ did not assume a heavenly body, which He brought to earth by passing through the Blessed Virgin as through a pipe, as the Valentinians formerly, and the Anabaptists now teach, but that His body was formed from the Virgin.

Made under the law. Though Christ, even as man, was not subject to the law, because He was still the Son of God, the giver of the law, yet of His own free-will He observed it, and of His own free-will submitted Himself to circumcision, and to its other ceremonial enactments. Made, therefore, denotes, not obligation, but practice; not right, but fact.

To redeem them that were under the law. By paying the price, might bestow on them Christian liberty The reference is to the bondage of the law, not of sin.

That we might receive the adoption of sons. (1.) The Son of God was made of a woman Son of man, that He might make the sons of men sons of God. " God was made man," says S. Bernard, " that man might be made God." (2.) This adoption is by grace, by which we obtain not only a right to be heirs of God the Father, but also participation in the Divine Nature, the Holy Spirit Himself, and sonship with God. (3.) Although all the righteous, even before Christ, were sons of God by adoption, yet the Apostle calls them all slaves—( a ) because, although the righteous were truly sons of God, yet they had not the status of sons, but only of slaves, being under the law, and consequently under the spirit of servile fear. ( b ) Because they had not the right of sonship through the law, but through their faith in Christ yet to come; and they belonged, therefore, more to the New Law than to the Old, as Augustine proves happily and exhaustively ( contra Duas Epp. Pelag. cap. 4). ( c ) Because they lacked the fruit of adoption, in being unable to discern their heavenly inheritance before Christ revealed it. ( d ) Because Christ, in setting us free from the yoke of the law, substituted for it in the New Law the one spirit of adoption and of love.

Ver. 6. — The Spirit of His Son. The Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is an argument from effect to cause, as when we say, "Where there is smoke there is fire." God first sent forth the Spirit of His Son to us, from which it followed that we became sons of God. Because we are sons, therefore, we know that He hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son, else should we not be sons. Because, therefore, denotes not so much the efficient cause as the logical reason.

Or, better still, we may connect the particle because with the cry, " Abba, Father." God hath sent forth His Spirit, not to make you sons, but to make you cry, " Abba, Father."

Crying. Causing you to invoke God ardently, confidently, with filial affection. It is the clamour of the heart, not of the mouth, as in Exo 15:15.

Abba. The Hebrew Ab, the Syriac Abba, which in Greek and Latin becomes Abbas, denotes father. See my notes to Rom 8:15. As this place is a terror to the lukewarm, who rarely experience this feeling of filial prayer, so does it inspire the devout, who seek it within with a hope of salvation and enjoyment of their heavenly inheritance.

Ver. 8. — Howbeit then. When you were pagan unbelievers, and lived in ignorance of God.

Which by nature are no gods. But only in the estimation of man.

Ver. 9. — But now after that ye have known God, &c. Known by God, as beloved sons of their Father. " God is ignorant of no one," says S. Jerome, " but He is said to know those who have exchanged error for piety." Better still, it may be rendered, made to know, taught by God, by a common Hebraism. The Hiphil ("he caused to know") and the Hophal ("he was made to know") have no exact equivalent voice in Latin or Greek, and are, therefore, expressed by a participle, with a loss of the force of the original Hebrew. Cf. 1 Cor. viii. 3. In other places, God is said to know when He makes us to know; and the Holy Spirit is said to cry aloud, or to pray, when He makes us cry aloud or pray. Cf. Rom 8:26. The meaning of the verse is, therefore, this: Since you have been taught by God inwardly by His grace, outwardly by our preaching what is the way of salvation in Christ, why do you turn again to the elements of the law, to be taught perfection by them? You are like a metaphysician beginning again the elements of grammar, or a runner returning from the goal to the starting-point. You were once near the goal of salvation; why then go back to the place you started from? You were theologians taught by God; why do you return to the law, as though you had lost your rights and were beginning again?

To the weak and beggarly elements. What are these? 1. Augustine and Ambrose understand by the phrase the sun and moon, and the idols formerly worshipped by the Galatians, and see a reference to the false gods mentioned above in verse 3. Tertullian, in a similar vein, says ( de Præscript. c. 33): " The Apostle censures Hermogenes, who, by introducing matter as uncreated, compares it to the uncreated God, and by making a goddess as mother of the elements, sets her up as an object of worship side by side with the one God." But the objection to this explanation is that the Galatians had no wish to return to Gentilism but to Judaism; and this the whole Epistle, with its condemnation of the Jewish ceremonies, clearly shows.

2. The explanation of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Œcumenius is better. According to them, these elements are the sun and moon, to which the Galatians wished to return, not to serve them as gods, as they had been used to do before they embraced Christianity, but to determine by their courses the Sabbaths, New Moons, and other Jewish feasts. He calls these elements weak and beggarly with reference to God, whose support they require continually, without which they are weak, and even unable to exist. If God withdrew His hand, they would sink into the nothing from which they came. That S. Paul is referring to the sun and moon appears from the fact that they are properly the elements of the world, as he styled them in verse 3, and also because he asks, " Why turn ye again " to the things which you used to worship? Among the Galatians these of course were not the Jewish ceremonies, but the sun and moon.

3. But the best explanation is that of Jerome, Theodoret, Anselm, and Tertullian ( contra Marcion, v. 4), who understand by these elements the Sacraments, and feast-days, and other ceremonies of the Old Law, which were given to the Jews, as the first rudiments of faith and piety, and through them to the whole world, and which were, as I have said in the notes to verse 3, symbols of the creation and government of the world. They are beggarly, and, as Tertullian calls them, fallacious, because they neither contain nor confer grace, but need for this the power of Christ. They are also weak, because they are of themselves of no efficacy to justify or sanctify; for without faith in Christ they could justify no one, nay, even with that faith they did not justify by themselves and ex opere operato, but only ex opere operantis, i.e., by the faith of the receiver. Accordingly, they were done away with when Christ came.

That this last explanation is the correct one is evident from what follows; for S. Paul goes on to say, " Ye observe days and months, and times and years," by which he gives them to understand that these were the elements that they served.

Moreover, this explanation is much the more simple and pertinent. For these elements, that is to say, these festal days they did observe, but they did not worship the sun and moon. Nor can it be said with strict truth that whoever observes the first day of the month is a moon-worshipper, or that one who keeps the Lord's Day is a sun-worshipper, when the Lord's Day is merely identified with Sunday, because the best of all days is assigned to the chief of all the heavenly bodies.

It may be objected that the word again is opposed to the explanation, and implies that the Galatians, as being formerly worshippers of the host of heaven, had returned to this worship, and not to Jewish observances, to which they had not been addicted.

I reply that S. Paul regards all men without distinction as having been under the law as their pædagogue, and accuses the Galatians of again setting up, by their action, the obsolete rites of Judaism.

But the answer of Adam is perhaps better, who refers the word again, not to the whole but to the part, as signifying only that slavery was restored in general, but not in this or that particular. The Galatians had at one time served idols, and afterwards Judaism, and they are here exhorted not to become slaves once more, whether to demons or to Jewish shadows. So we might say to a Lutheran who had embraced the Catholic faith, and afterwards lapsed into Calvinism: How can you fall into Calvinism again, that is into heresy? It is not Calvinism that is the significant word, but lapse, and the force of the question lies in its appeal against deserting the Catholic faith for heresy of any kind whatsoever.

Ver. 10 . — Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. As S. Augustine ( Ep. 119 and Enchirid. 79) and Anselm understand the elements to be the sun, moon, and idols, so do they understand this verse to mean days that were lucky or unlucky, according as astrology made them so. But Chrysostom and Jerome and others explain the days to be the Jewish Sabbaths; the months to be the new moons, and the seventh month, which was held sacred throughout; the times to be the stated feasts of the four seasons—the Passover, Pentecost, the Day of Atonement, and the New Year; and the years to be the seventh year of remission of debts, and the fiftieth year of jubilee. By the observance of days, months, and years, S. Paul means the ceremonies of the Old Law as a whole.

From this appears the error of the heretics, who infer from this that the feasts of the Church are condemned. If they were, then would the heretics themselves be condemned for keeping Sunday? What is condemned here is the observance of the Jewish feasts only. These are happily distinguished from those observed by Christians, by Gregory Nazianzen, in his Whitsuntide Oration, in which he says: " The Jew keeps feast days, but it is according to the letter; for by observing the corporeal law he attains not to the spiritual. The Gentile keeps feast days, but it is according to the body, in revelling and wantonness. [Accordingly Lucian ( Saturnalia ) bids that nothing be done during the time of the feast, whether in public or in private, but what pertains to sport, to pleasure, and to lust; nay, the feasts of the heathen were obscene in themselves, witness those of Venus, Priapus, and Bacchus, in whose honour every abomination was practised]. We Christians keep feasts, but only such as are pleasing to the Spirit. "

Jerome, too, says: " Any one may say that if it is not lawful to observe days, and months, and times, and years, then we do what is forbidden in observing Wednesdays, and Good Friday, and the Lords Day, and the Lenten fast, and the Easier solemnities, and the Whitsuntide festivities, and the days set apart in different places in honour of the martyrs. A wise and simple reply to this will be that the Jewish feast-days differ from ours. We do not observe the feast of unleavened bread, but that of the Cross and the Resurrection, nor do we number our weeks to Pentecost as the Jews did, but celebrate one coming of the Holy Spirit." From which we may observe that, in S. Jerome's time, days were set apart in honour of the martyrs, and that the practice is approved by him.

 Ver. 12 . — Be as I am. As you see me neglecting Jewish feasts, relying on my freedom in the Gospel, so do you neglect them and make use of the same freedom. I would be your leader into the land of liberty; follow me, therefore, and care nothing for what the Jews may say about the necessity of the Old Law.

I am as ye are. I live as a Gentile, and adapt myself to your needs, so far as I can with a safe conscience.

Ye have not injured me at all. Ifanybody, it is yourselves that you have injured. I do not say this in anger, but from love and pity. S. Jerome observes that the Apostle soothes here any feelings wounded by the rebuke of chap. iii. 1.

Ver. 13.— Through infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you. S. Jerome explains this to mean that he gave them the first and weak elements only of the faith, because of their weakness with regard to spiritual things. He also gives as a second interpretation of infirmity of the flesh, Paul's sicknesses and headaches, and as a third, his persecutions, poverty, and sufferings in general, which might make him seem an Apostle, weak, miserable, and despicable, and so unable to gain the respect of the Galatians.

Ver. 14. — And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not. Erasmus takes temptation in the active sense, viz., as though Paul had tempted the Galatians by his unattractive presence and speech. But it is better to take it passively, as being identical with the object of temptation. The meaning then is: You did not despise me in my weakness and my abject condition, which had the effect of making me a temptation to you, but you received me as an angel, nay, as Christ Himself. [ Note.—The Vulgate is: "And your temptation which was in my flesh."]

Ver. 15 . — Your blessedness. You beatified me for my sufferings for the faith, and as it were said to yourselves: Happy are we in having such an Apostle! "Happy they who have the privilege of hearing and seeing Paul!"  S. Augustine is said to have wished to see three things—Christ on earth in the flesh, Rome at the height of her power, and Paul thundering in his preaching.  S. Paul now asks the Galatians what had become of their former opinion of him; why they had so soon changed their minds, and given up their love for him, which was once ardent enough to make them pluck out their eyes for him; and inquires whether he had become their enemy for telling them the truth, viz., that no one is justified by the law, but only by faith in Christ.

Ver. 17.— They zealously affect you. The Judaisers do all they can to woo you to espouse their cause, and to bring you into subjection to their law, but their object is not good.

They would exclude you. Some texts read include here, which gives a very good meaning. These Judaisers are like crafty wooers, who, when they are seeking to win a wealthy wife, show her every kind of honour and service, and humour her whims in everything; but when they have attained their object, they shut her up, appoint custodians of her person, and treat her as a slave. They are now promising you, Galatians, great things; but they want to shut you up under the law, and shut you out from the liberty that is in Christ.

That ye might affect them. It is not friendship that animates them. They want to gain your confidence, that you may surrender to them, and become their disciples, and give, them ground for public boasting.

Ver. 18 . — But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing. It is good to imitate others, but only in what is good. [The Vulgate reading is in the imperative: Be zealously affected always to the good in what is good.]

Observe that the first good can be taken in the neuter, for what is good, or in the masculine. If the latter be read, then the meaning is: Do not be zealously affected towards Judaism, which is evil, but take as your models good Christian men like myself, whose manner of life among you ye know. You followed me when I was with you; you should do the same in my absence, for a good man is always to be imitated, whether absent or present. This is a hint that in the Apostle's opinion it was his absence which had been the cause of their lapse into Judaism.

Ver. 19 . — My little children. I begat you to Christ by the Gospel, and now that you have left Him for Judaism, I travail in birth of you again, till you learn to look to Christ for grace and justification, and not to the law. " The Apostle here," says Chrysostom, " Speaks of a mother's anxiety over her children. You see the feelings of a mother rather than of a father; you see his nervousness, and the cry of pain, much more agonising than that of a woman in travail." As the Blessed Virgin bore Christ in the flesh but without pain, so did Paul labour with Christ spiritually, though with pain and grief, and strive to form the Galatians for Christ, that He might be all in all to them.

S. Ambrose ( de Isaac et Animâ, c. 8) says, with equal piety and point: " There [in the Cross and in baptism] did your mother travail; there did she who bore you labour. There are we born again, for they are brought forth in whom the image of Christ is formed. He tells us how Christ was formed in His Spouse. Set me as a seal upon thy heart, as a seal upon thine arm. Christ is the seal upon the forehead, that we may ever confess Him; on the heart, that we may always love Him; on the arm, that we may always work for Him; so that, if it be possible, His whole likeness may be expressed in us, and He be our seal whom God the Father hath sealed."

Let those note who desire to convert souls to Christ, that they must labour and toil like a woman in travail. Hence the question is asked in Job xxxix. 1: " Knowest thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth? or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve? . . . They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones, they cast out their sorrows "—where the reference is to the belief that the hinds suffer more acutely than most animals in parturition, a belief that was shared by Aristotle and Pliny. S. Gregory takes this passage mystically of preachers who, like hinds in labour, bring forth offspring to Christ with tears and sorrow.

" I see," he says, " that Paul is like a hind bringing forth its young with great pain; for he says, 'My little children, of whom I travail in birth again.' See the pain, see the labour he suffered; even after he was delivered he was conspelled to give life again to his offspring when it had perished. " (Morals xxx. 21)

Let bishops, too, learn from S. Paul to be not so much fathers as mothers to their subjects, as S. Bernard says excellently ( Serm. 25 in Cant.). " Learn to be mothers, not lords, to those under your charge. Seek to be loved rather than feared; and if sometimes there is need of severity, let it be that of a father, not of a tyrant."

Ver. 20.— I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice. I would wish to say orally what a letter cannot sufficiently express; I would wish to coax, to beseech, to implore you, to treat you as a mother does her children, to manifest in every way a mother's affection, that I might persuade you to do what I wish.

See what love makes men do. Paul makes himself a father, and becomes a boy with his children. So King Agesilaus, to amuse his boy, would lay aside his purple and his sceptre, to ride on a stick for him; and when one of his court remarked on his levity, he retorted: " Hold your tongue, for when you have children of your own, then I will give you leave to laugh at your king's folly." So here Paul would say that a mother's love knows no bounds, no shame; for it no toil is too great, nothing is too trivial or too shameful.

I stand in doubt of you. "I am ashamed," as some render it, but wrongly. The meaning is: I am perplexed; I do not know what to say to you to persuade you. Maldonatus gives two interpretations: (1.) I have not obtained the expected fruit of my preaching, therefore I am confounded; and (2.) I do not know whether you are Christians or Jews.

Ver. 21. — Do ye not hear the law? A vigorous question. If you will not listen to me, will you not listen to the law, that you think so much of, for it will point you from itself to Christ?

Ver. 22. — Abraham had two sons. Ishmael, by his handmaiden, Hagar, who was, therefore, but a wife of secondary rank; and Isaac, by Sarah, his wife of honour. The latter was his heir; the former received such gifts as the father chose to give him. Cf. Gen. xxv. 5, 6.

Ver. 23 . — He who was of the bondwoman. Ishmael was born according to the laws of natural generation, by which Abraham, though an old man, was able to raise up seed from his youthful bondwoman, Hagar.

He of the freewoman was by promise. Isaac was not born according to the usual laws of generation, for Sarah, his mother, was then sterile by age, so that Abraham could not in the order of nature beget a son by her. He was born by promise, i.e., by the supernatural power of God, in fulfilment of the promise made to Abraham.

Ver. 24. —Which things are an allegory. An allegory with rhetoricians is a continued metaphor. With ecclesiastical writers it is identical with a type or figure in which things and events of the Old Testament represented their parallels in the New.

For these are the two covenants. Sarah and Hagar signify respectively the two covenants, the New and the Old. There are four senses of Scripture: (1.) The literal, as e.g., when it is said that Abraham begat Ishmael of Hagar naturally, and Isaac of Sarah supernaturally; (2.) the allegorical, as when it is said, " These are the two covenants ;" (3.) the tropological, of which we find an example in verse 29; (4.) the anagogical, which is used in verse 26.

The first covenant referred to here is that made by God with Moses on Mount Sinai, in which God promised to be the God of the Hebrews, and to give them the land of Canaan, and the Hebrews on their part promised to keep the law of their God, whether moral, judicial, or ceremonial. The second covenant is that made with Christ and Christians at Jerusalem, in which God promised to be the God of the Christians, and to give them a heavenly inheritance; and the Christians on their part promised by Christ and His Apostles to preserve the faith of Christ, and to obey His precepts. This latter appears throughout the Gospels, and especially in the record of the Last Supper, given by S. John in chap. xiii. et seq. There Christ confirmed this covenant in His own blood, as is narrated by SS. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul.

The one from the Mount Sinai. The Old Covenant, given from Mount Sinai, made slaves of the Jews, by bringing them under the shadows of burdensome ceremonies, obliging them to obedience under fear of punishment, or by the promise of earthly goods, such as abundance of corn and wine and oil.

Which is Agar. Hagar the slave typifies the covenant of slavery.

Ver. 25. — For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia. Mount Sinai was called Hagar by the Arabs, according to Chrysostom and others. But this explanation is forced, and leaves a gap in the argument. As we have just seen, Hagar represents the Old Covenant given on Mount Sinai, and this is the sense of the passage.

In Arabia. Even the Arabs typify this Jewish slavery, for they themselves are subject to it. Hence the saying, "the Arabian pipe," mentioned by Julius Pollux, which shows their servile condition, since slaves only (and they for the most part came from Arabia) used to practise the art of music. The Old Covenant of slavery was, therefore, fitly entered into in Arabia, i.e., on Mount Sinai. Chrysostom adds: " Hagar in Hebrew denotes dwelling, Sinai temptation, Arabia falling, Ishmael the hearing of God." Jerome says: " Hagar shows by its meaning that the Old Covenant would not be for ever; Sinai, that it would be a temptation; Arabia, that it would perish; Ishmael, as the name of one who heard only the commandments of God but did not do them, a rough man, a man of blood, the enemy of his brethren, that the Jews would be hard and harsh, enemies of Christians, hearers only of the law, and not doers."

S. Jerome again says tropologically: " Those Christians are born of Hagar who look only at the shell of Holy Scripture, and serve the Lord in fear. Those are born of Sarah who treat the Old Covenant as an allegory, and seek for its spirit, and who serve the Lord in love." See also the remarks of S. Augustine ( contra Duas Epp. Pelag. cap. 4), where he lays down that Abraham, Noah, Moses, and all the righteous men of the Old Covenant, were really children of the New, inasmuch as they were justified by the same faith in the Incarnation and Passion of Christ as Christians, and lived by the same grace and the same love of Christ; while, on the other hand, Christians who keep the law from fear of punishment are children of the Old and not of the New Covenant.

Which is joined to that which now is Jerusalem. So the Vulgate. S. Jerome and Chrysostom take it of a literal vicinity to Jerusalem, inasmuch as Jerusalem borders on the desert in which Sinai is situated, the hills of Idumæa alone intervening. But these hills comprise the whole of Idumæa, which is a large tract, and, therefore, it cannot be said Sinai is joined to Judæa. It would be more accurate to say that it was widely separated from it.

S. Thomas interprets it to mean that Sinai is joined to Jerusalem, not by nearness, but by a continuous road, because the Hebrews went from Egypt by a straight road through Sinai into Judæa. But this is too far fetched. In the same way the Red Sea, and Egypt itself, might be said to be joined to Judæa.

Accordingly, it is better to understand the words to mean that the conjunction is not of place but of likeness.

With this agrees the Greek word here, συστοιχεί, which means kinship or likeness. Στοίχειν means to go forward in order, or to stand in one's place. So grammarians call the letters of the alphabet στοιχει̃α, because they are joined in a certain order. Philosophers call the elements—earth, air, fire, and water—by the same name, because each of them has its due place, and its relation to the others. Also verses are called στίχοι, and lines in order, στίχαι. Hence, as Budæus says, kindred things are called σύστοιχα, and συστοιχία is a series of similar things duly arranged. So here, of Mount Sinai it is said that it, συστοιχει̃, i.e., it has a similarity, it is in the same series or order of things as Jerusalem, because it represents it by a convenient type.

This it does (1.) because, as Mount Sinai is sterile in the desert, so is Jerusalem in its ceremonies. Moreover, the law was given in the first, preserved in the second. (2.) Sinai was outside the Promised land; the Jerusalem of the law is outside the Church of Christ, whether militant or triumphant. (3.) Which is more germane to the Apostle's purpose; as Sinai nourished and brought up slaves whether Jews or Arabs, and as from it proceeded a servile law, with the sound of the trumpet, with thundering and earthquake, which, therefore, suitably drove its votaries into obedience by fear; so is now Jerusalem, so far as its life and doctrine are concerned, Sinaitic, and produces slaves to the shadows of the law, who obey through fear only. (4.) Sinai is related to Jerusalem also, because the Jews, who received the law at Sinai, were the fathers of those who kept it in Jerusalem; and as the I fathers were, so are the sons.

By metonymy, Sinai and Jerusalem are put for their inhabitants. As Hagar the bondwoman signified the bondage of the Old Covenant, so Mount Sinai, in bringing forth slaves, typified Jerusalem, which did the same. Such as Sinai was, such is Jerusalem. The former was the parent of the slaves, so too is the latter.

Subjoined is a tabular statement of the typology used here:—

SLAVERY

FREEDOM Hagar the bondwoman

Ishmael, a slave, born after the flesh

The law given at Sinai

The earthly Jerusalem, the synagogue of the Jews, in bondage

The Jews immersed in the shadows of the ceremonial law. Two wives

Two sons

Two covenants

Two cities

Two sons Sarah the freewoman.

Isaac, a freeman, born according to promise.

The Gospel given at Sion.

The heavenly Jerusalem, by grace the mother of all the faithful, free.

The faithful who enjoy the grace of Christ.

Jerusalem which now is. The earthly Jerusalem is contrasted with the heavenly, the transitory with that which is to endure for ever.

It may be noted that Jerusalem is not compounded of Jebus and Salem, as Erasmus and others have thought, but of a Hebrew word meaning he shall see, and Salem, in allusion to Gen 22:14. Hence the meaning of the word is the vision of peace.

And is in bondage with her children. The reference is of course to Hager. As she, a bondwoman, bore Ishmael, he and his descendants inherit their mother's status; so does the Old Covenant, typified by her, bring forth bondmen. On the other hand, as Sarah was a free woman, her children are free, as are the children of the New Covenant.

The slavery of the Old Covenant consisted mainly in two things, in its obliging men to obedience by fear, and in burdening them with a multitude of dumb ceremonies, which were of no avail to justification. On the other hand, the liberty of the Gospel consists in its leading us to obedience through love, and in teaching us to worship God in spirit and in truth. It has no doubt its own ceremonies, nut they are all aids only to the spiritual life.

Ver. 26.— But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. The Christian Church, typified by Sarah, the mistress, is contrasted with the Jewish synagogue, typified by Hagar, the bondwoman, in four points: It is above; it is Jerusalem; it is free; it is a fruitful mother.

1. Why is it said to be above? Because ( a ) Christ, its Head, descended from heaven, and thither ascended to rule the Church from above. ( b ) Because the Church is perfected by heavenly things, faith, hope, and charity, which come from above ( c ) Because, the efficacy of the Sacraments is from above, and shows God Himself present in His Church, as though He had come down from above. ( d ) Because her conversation is in heaven, and there with her Spouse are her heart and treasure. ( e ) Because she is striving for her eternal crown laid up in heaven. Cf. Rev 21:2.

2. Why is she called Jerusalem? Because Jerusalem means the vision of peace. This God provides for His Church, so that she rejoices, not in earthly but in heavenly peace, according to the promise of her Lord. "Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you" (S. John xiv. 27). This peace comes from a good conscience towards God, self, and all men. Literally too the Church is entitled to be called Jerusalem, because there she had her beginning, as the Jewish Church had at Sinai. Hence the prophets repeatedly designate the Christian Church by the names of Sion or Jerusalem.

3. Why is she called free? Freedom is fourfold: ( a ) Civil, to which is opposed the status of slaves. ( b ) Moral, by which is excluded slavery to passion and lust, to the fear of adversity. In this the Stoics placed the perfection of happiness, and desired that every man should be able to say of himself: Though the world were shattered around him, its fragments would strike, but not daunt him ( Hor. Odes, iii. 3, 7). ( c ) Spiritual, springing from that perfect charity which casts out fear, by which we are able to serve God, not in servile fear, but in filial love; not with material ceremonies, but in spirit and in truth. This is the freedom in the Apostle's mind here. ( d ) Celestial, which excludes all slavery of mind or body to pain, and is the perfect bliss of mankind.

The Church already enjoys moral and spiritual liberty; by hope and desire it tastes beforehand the heavenly freedom it is one day to possess.

4. Why is she called a mother? Because out of Gentile barrenness, which was subject to devils, the Church has been collected, and has borne, and still bears, many spiritual children to Christ, and this not from Jews alone, but from Jews and Gentiles, without distinction.

Ver. 27. — Rejoice, thou barren. Rejoice, 0 Church, called out of the Gentiles; thou who wast once barren, without faith in God, and formerly not wont to bear children to Him—now that thou art espoused to Him break forth and cry. The synagogue, whose husband was the law, or even God Himself, not as a father tender, but as a lawgiver terrible, brought forth Jews only according to the flesh. But the Church embraces as a mother all the nations that believe on Christ. Therefore the synagogue has borne to God comparatively a small number of spiritual children. She bare the Prophets, the Patriarchs, and a few other righteous men, and that not in her own strength, but by the power of Christ, the father of the New Covenant.

The Apostle quotes Isa. liv. 1. The Jews indeed interpret the passage of their return to the earthly Jerusalem. The Millenarians understood it of the thousand years of sensual happiness which they pretended that the Saints would spend on earth after the Day of judgment, as Jerome testifies of them. S. Paul, however, makes it clear that Isaiah was speaking of the happiness and fruitfulness of the Christian Church. Of this S. Ambrose writes very beautifully ( de Virgin. lib. i.): " The Church is immaculate in conception, fruitful in offspring, a virgin in chastity, a mother in her family. We are born of a virgin who has been impregnated, not by a man but by the Spirit; who brings forth, not with bodily pain but with angelic rejoicing; who feeds her children with milk, not of earth but of the Apostles. She is a virgin in the Sacraments, and a mother in the virtues she produces. She is a mother to the nations, and Scripture testifies to her fruitfulness, saying: 'The desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.' Whether we interpret this of the Church among the nations, or the soul of each individual, in either case she is married to her heavenly Spouse by the word of God, without any deviation from the path of chastity."  S. Jerome, too, says, in his comments on this passage: " The Church, long time barren, bore no children before Christ was born of the Virgin; but when she bore to Abraham, i.e., the elect father, Christ as Isaac, the laughter of the world, whose very name spoke of heavenly mysteries, then she brought forth many children to God. "

Abraham in Hebrew is (according to Jerome) the elect father, with a mighty sound.

1. Abraham was first called Abram, the lofty father, and as such begat Ishmael from Hagar. Then when he entered into a covenant with God, and received the promise of the birth of Isaac, and of the possession by his seed of the land of Canaan, his name was changed to Abraham, the father of a great multitude, i.e., of a numerous offspring, to be begotten of Isaac according to the flesh, and of Christ according to the spirit. This is a sounder interpretation of the name than that given by Jerome.

2. Symbolically, Abraham represents God. From Hagar, the bondwoman, i.e., from the synagogue, he begat Ishmael, the bondservant, i.e., Moses and the Jews, who were under subjection to the Old Law. To them Abraham was a lofty father, giving the law in thunder from the heights of Sinai, and manifesting himself as a great and terrible Lord. On the other band, Abraham, i.e., God, begat from Sarah, the freewoman, i.e., the Church, Isaac, laughter, who represented Christ and His followers, heirs of the promises. To them Abraham was the father of a great multitude, gathered by Christ out of all nations, and regenerated by faith and baptism. Or if we take S. Jerome's interpretation of Abraham as denoting the elect father with a mighty sound, then we see the fulfilment of the name in the preaching of John Baptist, of Christ, and the Apostles, who with a loud voice called all nations to enter into the kingdom of God.

3. Isaac, i.e., Christ, is said to be born of Sarah, i.e., the Church, not as though the Church were actually the mother of Christ, or existed before Him, but because, in the Divine mind, the Church was, as it were, prior to Christ, and stood for His mother. For God first called the synagogue into existence, and then substituted for it the Church. Consequently, He had in His mind the idea of the synagogue first, of the Church second; and out of this He decreed that Moses should be born as the eldest son of this idea, and that he should reduce to actuality the remaining parts of the idea by instituting the synagogue. Similarly, He willed the creation of the Church, and the birth of Christ, as the first-born of His idea of the Church, who should carry out the idea, and found the Church of which He should be Himself the chief cornerstone. Hence Christ and Christians are called children of the promise and of the predestined purpose of God, because their existence was the product of the Divine will as the father, and of the Divine thought as the mother.

Ver. 28 . — Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. Since he was born of one barren through age—not according to the flesh, but according to the promise of God.

Ver. 29. — He that was born after the flesh. Ishmael, born naturally of Hagar, persecuted Isaac, born supernaturally of Sarah, according to the Divine promise, and so a type of the spiritual children of the New Law. The reference is to Gen. xxi. 9. From a comparison of these two passages it is evident that the mockery mentioned was a sort of persecution, the sort of sport that cats have with mice. So in 2Sa 2:14: "Abner said to Joab, Let the young men now arise and play before us," where the play was a mortal combat. Jerome and others think that the reason why Ishmael persecuted Isaac was because his envy was stirred up by the festivities indulged in at Isaac's weaning, and because he was jealous of the birthright assigned to his brother by promise. Hence it appears that he was hostile to the promised Seed, i.e., to Christ.

So it is now. As formerly Ishmael mocked and persecuted Isaac, so now have the Jews mocked and crucified Christ, the King of liberty, and are still pursuing with bitter hatred His followers. So too are they persecuting you, 0 Galatians, that they may enslave you, and turn you from the right way. See the comments of Jerome and Rupert on Gen 21:9.

Ver. 30.— Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son. Although Abraham shrank from this proposal of Sarah, yet God approved it, and bade Abraham do as Sarah demanded, not only because her demand was lawful and right, but also because his action would be a type of future events. The rejection of Hagar and Ishmael would typify the rejection of the Jewish synagogue, and its exclusion from the blessings of the Church, for persecuting Christ and His followers. Allegorically, Christians, as freemen, are inheritors of Abraham's blessing, while the Jews are shut out from it, because they are envious bondmen, persecutors of Christian freemen, just as Ishmael was forbidden to share with Isaac the paternal roof. The bondman was driven away from the freeman.

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Galatians (Book Introduction)

The Epistle To The Galatians

Probable Date a.d. 56 Or 57

By Way of Introduction

It is a pity that we are not able to visualize more clearly the time and place of writing this powerful polemic against the Judaizers who were trying to draw away from the evangelical gospel the churches of Galatia. The data are not clear as in the Thessalonian and Corinthian Epistles. There are many things that can be said, but few are decisive. One is that the Epistle was written about seventeen years after Paul’s conversion, adding the three years of Gal_1:18 and the fourteen of Gal_2:1, though not insisting on the full number in either case. Unfortunately we do not know the precise year of his conversion. It was somewhere between a.d. 31 and 36. Another thing that is clear is that the Epistle was written after the Conference in Jerusalem over the Judaizing controversy to which Paul refers in Gal_2:1-10 and after the subsequent visit of Peter to Antioch (Gal_2:11-14). The natural interpretation of Acts 15:1-33 is to understand it as the historical narrative of the public meetings of which Paul gives an inside view in Gal_2:1-10. Not all scholars agree to this view, but the weight of the argument is for it. If so, that rules out the contention of Ramsay and others that Galatians is the earliest of Paul’s Epistles. It was written then after that Conference which took place about a.d. 49. It seems clear also that it was written after the Epistles to the Thessalonians (a.d. 50-51) which were sent from Corinth.

Did Paul mean by Galatia the Roman province as he usually does or does he make an ethnographic use of the term and mean the real Celts of North Galatia? Luke uses geographical terms in either sense. Certainly Paul preached in South Galatia in his first mission tour. See note on Act_16:6 for the discussion about the language there as bearing on his going into North Galatia. By " the churches of Galatia" Paul can mean the whole of Galatia or either South or North Galatia. The various items mentioned, like the illness that led to his preaching (Gal_4:13), " the first time" or " formerly" (Gal_4:13), " so quickly" (Gal_1:6), are not conclusive as to time or place. If Paul means only the South Galatian Churches (Pisidia, Lycaonia, Phrygia), then the Epistle, even if two visits had been made, could come some time after the second tour of Act_16:1. The place could be Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, Antioch. Even so room must be made for the seventeen years after his conversion plus the interval thereafter (some twenty years in all). If Paul includes North Galatia, the time would be more easily handled (the twenty years required from a.d. 31 to 36 to a.d. 51 to 57) and the place could be Ephesus, Philippi, or Corinth. Special treatises on the date of Galatians have been written by Askwith (1899), Round (1906), Steinmann (1908), Weber (1900)

Lightfoot held that the similarity of Galatians to Romans (written from Corinth spring of a.d. 56 or 57) naturally argues for the same general period and place. It is a possible hypothesis that, when Paul reached Corinth late autumn or early winter of A.D. 55 or 56 (Act_20:1.), he received alarming reports of the damage wrought by the Judaizers in Galatia. He had won his fight against them in Corinth (I and II Corinthians). So now he hurls this thunderbolt at them from Corinth and later, in a calmer mood, sends the fuller discussion to the church in Rome. This hypothesis is adopted here, but with full recognition of the fact that it is only hypothesis. The language and the topics and the treatment are the same that we find in Romans. Galatians thus fits in precisely between II Corinthians and Romans. It is a flaming torch in the Judaizing controversy. This Epistle was the battle cry of Martin Luther in the Reformation. Today it has served as a bulwark against the wild criticism that has sought to remove the Pauline Epistles from the realm of historical study. Paul is all ablaze in this Epistle with indignation as he faces the men who are undermining his work in Galatia.

JFB: Galatians (Book Introduction)

THE internal and external evidence for Paul's authorship is conclusive. The style is characteristically Pauline. The superscription, and allusions to the apostle of the Gentiles in the first person, throughout the Epistle, establish the same truth (Gal 1:1, Gal 1:13-24; Gal 2:1-14). His authorship is also upheld by the unanimous testimony of the ancient Church: compare IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 3,7,2] (Gal 3:19); POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 3] quotes Gal 4:26; Gal 6:7; JUSTIN MARTYR, or whoever wrote the Discourse to the Greeks, alludes to Gal 4:12; Gal 5:20.

The Epistle was written "TO THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA" (Gal 1:2), a district of Asia Minor, bordering on Phrygia, Pontus, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Paphlagonia. The inhabitants (Gallo-græci, contracted into Galati, another form of the name Celts) were Gauls in origin, the latter having overrun Asia Minor after they had pillaged Delphi, about 280 B.C. and at last permanently settled in the central parts, thence called Gallo-græcia or Galatia. Their character, as shown in this Epistle, is in entire consonance with that ascribed to the Gallic race by all writers. Cæsar [Commentaries on the Gallic War, 4,5], "The infirmity of the Gauls is that they are fickle in their resolves and fond of change, and not to be trusted." So Thierry (quoted by ALFORD), "Frank, impetuous, impressible, eminently intelligent, but at the same time extremely changeable, inconstant, fond of show, perpetually quarrelling, the fruit of excessive vanity." They received Paul at first with all joy and kindness; but soon wavered in their allegiance to the Gospel and to him, and hearkened as eagerly now to Judaizing teachers as they had before to him (Gal 4:14-16). The apostle himself had been the first preacher among them (Act 16:6; Gal 1:8; Gal 4:13; see on Gal 4:13; "on account of infirmity of flesh I preached unto you at the first": implying that sickness detained him among them); and had then probably founded churches, which at his subsequent visit he "strengthened" in the faith (Act 18:23). His first visit was about A.D. 51, during his second missionary journey. JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 16.62] testifies that many Jews resided in Ancyra in Galatia. Among these and their brethren, doubtless, as elsewhere, he began his preaching. And though subsequently the majority in the Galatian churches were Gentiles (Gal 4:8-9), yet these were soon infected by Judaizing teachers, and almost suffered themselves to be persuaded to undergo circumcision (Gal 1:6; Gal 3:1, Gal 3:3; Gal 5:2-3; Gal 6:12-13). Accustomed as the Galatians had been, when heathen, to the mystic worship of Cybele (prevalent in the neighboring region of Phrygia), and the theosophistic doctrines connected with that worship, they were the more readily led to believe that the full privileges of Christianity could only be attained through an elaborate system of ceremonial symbolism (Gal 4:9-11; Gal 5:7-12). They even gave ear to the insinuation that Paul himself observed the law among the Jews, though he persuaded the Gentiles to renounce it, and that his motive was to keep his converts in a subordinate state, excluded from the full privileges of Christianity, which were enjoyed by the circumcised alone (Gal 5:11, Gal 4:16, compare with Gal 2:17); and that in "becoming all things to all men," he was an interested flatterer (Gal 1:10), aiming at forming a party for himself: moreover, that he falsely represented himself as an apostle divinely commissioned by Christ, whereas he was but a messenger sent by the Twelve and the Church at Jerusalem, and that his teaching was now at variance with that of Peter and James, "pillars" of the Church, and therefore ought not to be accepted.

His PURPOSE, then, in writing this Epistle was: (1) to defend his apostolic authority (Gal 1:11-19; Gal 2:1-14); (2) to counteract the evil influence of the Judaizers in Galatia (Gal. 3:1-4:31), and to show that their doctrine destroyed the very essence of Christianity, by lowering its spirituality to an outward ceremonial system; (3) to give exhortation for the strengthening of Galatian believers in faith towards Christ, and in the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:1-6:18). He had already, face to face, testified against the Judaizing teachers (Gal 1:9; Gal 4:16; Act 18:23); and now that he has heard of the continued and increasing prevalence of the evil, he writes with his own hand (Gal 6:11 : a labor which he usually delegated to an amanuensis) this Epistle to oppose it. The sketch he gives in it of his apostolic career confirms and expands the account in Acts and shows his independence of human authority, however exalted. His protest against Peter in Gal 2:14-21, disproves the figment, not merely of papal, but even of that apostle's supremacy; and shows that Peter, save when specially inspired, was fallible like other men.

There is much in common between this Epistle and that to the Romans on the subject of justification by faith only, and not by the law. But the Epistle to the Romans handles the subject in a didactic and logical mode, without any special reference; this Epistle, in a controversial manner, and with special reference to the Judaizers in Galatia.

The STYLE combines the two extremes, sternness. (Gal. 1:1-24; Gal 3:1-5) and tenderness (Gal 4:19-20), the characteristics of a man of strong emotions, and both alike well suited for acting on an impressible people such as the Galatians were. The beginning is abrupt, as was suited to the urgency of the question and the greatness of the danger. A tone of sadness, too, is apparent, such as might be expected in the letter of a warm-hearted teacher who had just learned that those whom he loved were forsaking his teachings for those of perverters of the truth, as well as giving ear to calumnies against himself.

The TIME OF WRITING was after the visit to Jerusalem recorded in Act 15:1, &c.; that is, A.D. 50, if that visit be, as seems probable, identical with that in Gal 2:1. Further, as Gal 1:9 ("as we said before"), and Gal 4:16 ("Have [ALFORD] I become your enemy?" namely, at my second visit, whereas I was welcomed by you at my first visit), refer to his second visit (Act 18:23), this Epistle must have been written after the date of that visit (the autumn of A.D. 54). Gal 4:13, "Ye know how . . . I preached . . . at the first" (Greek, "at the former time"), implies that Paul, at the time of writing, had been twice in Galatia; and Gal 1:6, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed," implies that he wrote not long after having left Galatia for the second time; probably in the early part of his residence at Ephesus (Act 18:23; Act 19:1, &c., from A.D. 54, the autumn, to A.D. 57, Pentecost) [ALFORD]. CONYBEARE and HOWSON, from the similarity between this Epistle and that to the Romans, the same line of argument in both occupying the writer's mind, think it was not written till his stay at Corinth (Act 20:2-3), during the winter of 57-58, whence he wrote his Epistle to the Romans; and certainly, in the theory of the earlier writing of it from Ephesus, it does seem unlikely that the two Epistles to the Corinthians, so dissimilar, should intervene between those so similar as the Epistles to the Galatians and Romans; or that the Epistle to the Galatians should intervene between the second to the Thessalonians and the first to the Corinthians. The decision between the two theories rests on the words, "so soon." If these be not considered inconsistent with little more than three years having elapsed since his second visit to Galatia, the argument, from the similarity to the Epistle to the Romans, seems to me conclusive. This to the Galatians seems written on the urgency of the occasion, tidings having reached him at Corinth from Ephesus of the Judaizing of many of his Galatian converts, in an admonitory and controversial tone, to maintain the great principles of Christian liberty and justification by faith only; that to the Romans is a more deliberate and systematic exposition of the same central truths of theology, subsequently drawn up in writing to a Church with which he was personally unacquainted. See on Gal 1:6, for BIRKS'S view. PALEY [Horæ Paulinæ] well remarks how perfectly adapted the conduct of the argument is to the historical circumstances under which the Epistle was written! Thus, that to the Galatians, a Church which Paul had founded, he puts mainly upon authority; that to the Romans, to whom he was not personally known, entirely upon argument.

JFB: Galatians (Outline)

• SUPERSCRIPTION. GREETINGS. THE CAUSE OF HIS WRITING IS THEIR SPEEDY FALLING AWAY FROM THE GOSPEL HE TAUGHT. DEFENSE OF HIS TEACHING: HIS APOSTOLIC CALL INDEPENDENT OF MAN. (Gal. 1:1-24)
• HIS CO-ORDINATE AUTHORITY AS APOSTLE OF THE CIRCUMCISION RECOGNIZED BY THE APOSTLES. PROVED BY HIS REBUKING PETER FOR TEMPORIZING AT ANTIOCH: HIS REASONING AS TO THE INCONSISTENCY OF JUDAIZING WITH JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. (Gal. 2:1-21) Translate, "After fourteen years"; namely, from Paul's conversion inclusive [ALFORD]. In the fourteenth year from his conversion [BIRKS]. The same visit to Jerusalem as in Act 15:1-4 (A.D. 50), when the council of the apostles and Church decided that Gentile Christians need not be circumcised. His omitting allusion to that decree is; (1) Because his design here is to show the Galatians his own independent apostolic authority, whence he was not likely to support himself by their decision. Thus we see that general councils are not above apostles. (2) Because he argues the point upon principle, not authoritative decisions. (3) The decree did not go the length of the position maintained here: the council did not impose Mosaic ordinances; the apostle maintains that the Mosaic institution itself is at an end. (4) The Galatians were Judaizing, not because the Jewish law was imposed by authority of the Church as necessary to Christianity, but because they thought it necessary to be observed by those who aspired to higher perfection (Gal 3:3; Gal 4:21). The decree would not at all disprove their view, and therefore would have been useless to quote. Paul meets them by a far more direct confutation, "Christ is of no effect unto you whosoever are justified by the law" (Gal 5:4), [PALEY].
• REPROOF OF THE GALATIANS FOR ABANDONING FAITH FOR LEGALISM. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH VINDICATED: THE LAW SHOWN TO BE SUBSEQUENT TO THE PROMISE: BELIEVERS ARE THE SPIRITUAL SEED OF ABRAHAM, WHO WAS JUSTIFIED BY FAITH. THE LAW WAS OUR SCHOOLMASTER TO BRING US TO CHRIST, THAT WE MIGHT BECOME CHILDREN OF GOD BY FAITH. (Gal. 3:1-29)
• THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED: ILLUSTRATION OF OUR SUBJECTION TO THE LAW ONLY TILL CHRIST CAME, FROM THE SUBJECTION OF AN HEIR TO HIS GUARDIAN TILL HE IS OF AGE. PETER'S GOOD WILL TO THE GALATIANS SHOULD LEAD THEM TO THE SAME GOOD WILL TO HIM AS THEY HAD AT FIRST SHOWN. THEIR DESIRE TO BE UNDER THE LAW SHOWN BY THE ALLEGORY OF ISAAC AND ISHMAEL TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THEIR GOSPEL LIBERTY. (Gal. 4:1-31) The fact of God's sending His Son to redeem us who were under the law (Gal 4:4), and sending the Spirit of His Son into our hearts (Gal 4:6), confirms the conclusion (Gal 3:29) that we are "heirs according to the promise."
• PERORATION. EXHORTATION TO STAND FAST IN THE GOSPEL LIBERTY, JUST SET FORTH, AND NOT TO BE LED BY JUDAIZERS INTO CIRCUMCISION, OR LAW JUSTIFICATION: YET THOUGH FREE, TO SERVE ONE ANOTHER BY LOVE: TO WALK IN THE SPIRIT, BEARING THE FRUIT THEREOF, NOT IN THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. (Gal. 5:1-26) The oldest manuscripts read, "in liberty (so ALFORD, MOBERLEY, HUMPHRY, and ELLICOTT. But as there is no Greek for 'in,' as there is in translating in 1Co 16:13; Phi 1:27; Phi 4:1, I prefer 'It is FOR freedom that') Christ hath made us free (not in, or for, a state of bondage). Stand fast, therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage" (namely, the law, Gal 4:24; Act 15:10). On "again," see on Gal 4:9.
• EXHORTATIONS CONTINUED; TO FORBEARANCE AND HUMILITY; LIBERALITY TO TEACHERS AND IN GENERAL. POSTSCRIPT AND BENEDICTION. (Gal. 6:1-18)

TSK: Galatians (Book Introduction)

The Galatians, or Gallograecians, were the descendants of Gauls, who migrated from their own country, and after a series of disasters, got possession of a large district in Asia Minor, from them called Galatia (Pausanias, Attic. c. iv). They are mentioned by historians as a tall and valiant people, who went nearly naked, and used for arms only a buckler and sword; and the impetuosity of their attack is said to have been irresistible. Their religion, before their conversion was extremely corrupt and superstitious; they are said to have worshipped the mother of the gods, under the name of Adgistis; and to have offered human sacrifices of the prisoners they took in war. Though they spoke the Greek language in common with almost all the inhabitants of Asia Minor, yet it appears from Jerome that they retained their original Gaulish language even as late as the fifth century. Christianity appears to have been first planted in these regions by St. Paul himself (Gal 1:6; Gal 4:13); who visited the churches at least twice in that country (Act 16:6; Act 18:23). It is evident that this epistle was written soon after their reception of the gospel, as he complains of their speedy apostasy from his doctrine (Gal 1:6); and as there is no notice of his second journey into that country, it has been supposed, with much probability, that it was written soon after his first, and consequently about ad 52 or 53. It appears that soon after the Apostle had left them, some Judaizing teachers intruded themselves into the churches; drawing them off from the true gospel, to depend on ceremonial observances, and to the vain endeavour of " establishing their own righteousness." It was in order to oppose this false gospel that St. Paul addressed the Galatians, and after saluting the churches of Galatia, and establishing his apostolic commission against the attacks of the false teachers, he reproves them for departing from that gospel which he had preached to them, and confirmed by the gift of the Holy Ghost - proves that justification is by faith alone, and not by the deeds of the law, from the example of Abraham, the testimony of Scripture, the curse of the law, the redemption of Christ, and the Abrahamic covenant, which the law could not disannul - shows the use of the law in connection with the covenant of grace; concludes that all believers are delivered from the law, and made the spiritual seed of Abraham by faith in Christ; illustrates his inference by God’s treatment of the Jewish church, which he put under the law, as a father puts a minor under a guardian; shows the weakness and folly of the Galatians in subjecting themselves to the law, and that by submitting themselves to circumcision they become subject to the whole law, and would forfeit the benefits of the covenant of grace; gives them various instructions and exhortations for their Christian conduct, and particularly concerning the right use of their Christian freedom; and concludes with a brief summary of the topics discussed, and by commending them to the grace of Christ.

TSK: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Gal 4:1, We were under the law till Christ came, as the heir is under the guardian till he be of age; Gal 4:5, But Christ freed us from the law; Gal 4:7, therefore we are servants no longer to it; Gal 4:14, He remembers their good will to him, and his to them; Gal 4:22, and shows that we are the sons of Abraham by the freewoman.

Poole: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 4

MHCC: Galatians (Book Introduction)

The churches in Galatia were formed partly of converted Jews, and partly of Gentile converts, as was generally the case. St. Paul asserts his apostolic character and the doctrines he taught, that he might confirm the Galatian churches in the faith of Christ, especially with respect to the important point of justification by faith alone. Thus the subject is mainly the same as that which is discussed in the epistle to the Romans, that is, justification by faith alone. In this epistle, however, attention is particularly directed to the point, that men are justified by faith without the works of the law of Moses. Of the importance of the doctrines prominently set forth in this epistle, Luther thus speaks: " We have to fear as the greatest and nearest danger, lest Satan take from us this doctrine of faith, and bring into the church again the doctrine of works and of men's traditions. Wherefore it is very necessary that this doctrine be kept in continual practice and public exercise, both of reading and hearing. If this doctrine be lost, then is also the doctrine of truth, life and salvation, lost and gone."

MHCC: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

(Gal 4:1-7) The folly of returning to legal observances for justification.

(Gal 4:8-11) The happy change made in the Gentile believers.

(Gal 4:12-18) The apostle reasons against following false teachers.

(Gal 4:19, Gal 4:20) He expresses his earnest concern for them.

(Gal 4:21-31) And then explains the difference between what is to be expected from the law, and from the gospel.

Matthew Henry: Galatians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians

This epistle of Paul is directed not to the church or churches of a single city, as some others are, but of a country or province, for so Galatia was. It is very probable that these Galatians were first converted to the Christian faith by his ministry; or, if he was not the instrument of planting, yet at least he had been employed in watering these churches, as is evident from this epistle itself, and also from Act 18:23, where we find him going over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples. While he was with them, they had expressed the greatest esteem and affection both for his person and ministry; but he had not been long absent from them before some judaizing teachers got in among them, by whose arts and insinuations they were soon drawn into a meaner opinion both of the one and of the other. That which these false teachers chiefly aimed at was to draw them off from the truth as it is in Jesus, particularly in the great doctrine of justification, which they grossly perverted, by asserting the necessity of joining the observance of the law of Moses with faith in Christ in order to it: and, the better to accomplish this their design, they did all they could to lessen the character and reputation of the apostle, and to raise up their own on the ruins of his, representing him as one who, if he was to be owned as an apostle, yet was much inferior to others, and particularly who deserved not such a regard as Peter, James, and John, whose followers, it is likely, they pretended to be: and in both these attempts they had but too great success. This was the occasion of his writing this epistle, wherein he expresses his great concern that they had suffered themselves to be so soon turned aside from the faith of the gospel, vindicates his own character and authority as an apostle against the aspersions of his enemies, showing that his mission and doctrine were both divine, and that he was not, upon any account, behind the very chief of the apostles, 2Co 11:5. He then sets himself to assert and maintain the great gospel doctrine of justification by faith without the works of the law, and to obviate some difficulties that might be apt to arise in their minds concerning it: and, having established this important doctrine, he exhorts them to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free, cautions them against the abuse of this liberty, gives them several very needful counsels and directions and then concludes the epistle by giving them a just description of those false teachers by whom they had been ensnared, and, on the contrary, of his own temper and behaviour. In all this his great scope and design were to recover those who had been perverted, to settle those who might be wavering, and to confirm such among them as had kept their integrity.

Matthew Henry: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle, in this chapter, is still carrying on the same general design as in the former - to recover these Christians from the impressions made upon them by the judaizing teachers, and to represent their weakness and folly in suffering themselves to be drawn away from the gospel doctrine of justification, and to be deprived of their freedom from the bondage of the law of Moses. For this purpose he makes use of various considerations; such as, I. The great excellence of the gospel state above the legal (Gal 4:1-7). II. The happy change that was made in them at their conversion (Gal 4:8-11). III. The affection they had had for him and his ministry (Gal 4:12-16). IV. The character of the false teachers by whom they had been perverted (Gal 4:17, Gal 4:18). V. The very tender affection he had for them (Gal 4:19, Gal 4:20). VI. The history of Isaac and Ishmael, by a comparison taken from which he illustrates the difference between such as rested in Christ and such as trusted in the law. And in all these, as he uses great plainness and faithfulness with them, so he expresses the tenderest concern for them.

Barclay: Galatians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227.) It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to let

me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly, that

I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and because

of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give Capito my

heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and my friends.

I sent you a little picture of myself painted by Euctemon. My

military name is Antonius Maximus. I pray for your good health.

Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and Turbo,

Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri,

36.)

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who will Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col 2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added his own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end.) In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me" (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 ).

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTER TO THE GALATIANS

Paul Under Attack

Someone has likened the letter to the Galatians to a sword flashing in a great swordsmanhand. Both Paul and his gospel were under attack. If that attack had succeeded, Christianity might have become just another Jewish sect, might have become a thing dependent upon circumcision and on keeping the law, instead of being a thing of grace. It is strange to think that, if Paulopponents had had their way, the gospel might have been kept for Jews and we might never have had the chance to know the love of Christ.

PaulApostleship Attacked

It is impossible for a man to possess a vivid personality and a strong character like Paul and not encounter opposition; and equally impossible for a man to lead such a revolution in religious thought as he did and not be attacked. The first attack was on his apostleship. There were many to say that he was no apostle at all.

From their own point of view they were right. In Act_1:21-22 we have the basic definition of an apostle. Judas the traitor had committed suicide; it was necessary to fill the blank made in the apostolic band. They define the man to be chosen as one who must be "one of these men who were with us during all the time our Lord went in and out amongst us, beginning from the baptism of John, until the day he was taken from us" and "a witness of the Resurrection." To be an apostle a man must have companied with Jesus during his earthly life and have witnessed his Resurrection. That qualification Paul obviously did not fulfil. Further, not so very long ago he had been the arch-persecutor of the Christian Church.

In Gal_1:1 Paul answers that. Proudly he insists that his apostleship is from no human source and that no human hand ordained him to that office, but that he received his call direct from God. Others might have the qualifications demanded when the first blank in the apostolic band was filled; but he had a unique qualification--he had met Christ face to face on the Damascus Road.

Independence And Agreement

Further, Paul insists that for his message he was dependent on no man. That is why in Gal 1-2 he carefully details his visits to Jerusalem. He is insisting that he is not preaching some second-hand message which he received from a man; he is preaching a message which he received direct from Christ. But Paul was no anarchist. He insisted that, although his message was received in entire independence, it yet had received the full approval of those who were the acknowledged leaders of the Christian Church (Gal_2:6-10 ). The gospel he preached came direct from God to him; but it was a gospel in full agreement with the faith delivered to the Church.

The Judaizers

But that gospel was under attack as well. It was a struggle which had to come and a battle which had to be fought. There were Jews who had accepted Christianity; but they believed that all Godpromises and gifts were for Jews alone and that no Gentile could be admitted to these precious privileges. They therefore believed that Christianity was for Jews and Jews alone. If Christianity was Godgreatest gift to men, that was all the more reason that none but Jews should be allowed to enjoy it. In a way that was inevitable. There was a type of Jew who arrogantly believed in the idea of the chosen people. He could say the most terrible things--"God loves only Israel of all the nations he has made." "God will judge Israel with one measure and the Gentiles with another." "The best of the snakes crush; the best of the Gentiles kill." "God created the Gentiles to be fuel for the fires of Hell." This was the spirit which made the law lay it down that it was illegal to help a Gentile mother in her sorest hour, for that would only be to bring another Gentile into the world. When this type of Jew saw Paul bringing the gospel to the despised Gentile, he was appalled and infuriated.

The Law

There was a way out of this. If a Gentile wished to become a Christian, let him become a Jew first. What did that mean? It meant that he must be circumcised and take the whole burden of the law upon him. That, for Paul, was the opposite of all that Christianity meant. It meant that a mansalvation was dependent on his ability to keep the law and could be won by his own unaided efforts; whereas, to Paul salvation was entirely a thing of grace. He believed that no man could ever earn the favour of God. All he could do was accept the love God offered him by making an act of faith and flinging himself on his mercy. The Jew would go to God saying, "Look! Here is my circumcision. Here are my works. Give me the salvation I have earned." Paul would say:

"Not the labours of my hands

Can fulfil thy lawdemands;

Could my zeal no respite know,

Could my tears for ever flow,

All for sin could not atone:

Thou must save, and thou alone.

Nothing in my hand I bring,

Simply to thy Cross I cling;

Naked, come to thee for dress;

Helpless, look to thee for grace;

Foul, I to the fountain fly;

Wash me, Saviour, or I die."

For him the essential thing was, not what a man could do for God, but what God had done for him.

"But," the Jews argued, "the greatest thing in our national life is the law. God gave that law to Moses and on it our very lives depend." Paul replied, "Wait one moment. Who is the founder of our nation? To whom were the greatest of Godpromises given?" Of course, the answer is Abraham. "Now," went on Paul, "how was it that Abraham gained the favour of God? He could not have gained it by keeping the law because he lived four hundred and thirty years before the law was given to Moses. He gained it by an act of faith. When God told him to leave his people and go out, Abraham made a sublime act of faith and went, trusting everything to him. It was faith that saved Abraham, not law; and," Paul continues, "it is faith that must save every man, not deeds of the law. The real son of Abraham is not a man racially descended from him but one who, no matter his race, makes the same surrender of faith to God."

The Law And Grace

If all this be true, one very serious question arises--what then is the place of the law? It cannot be denied that it was given by God; does this emphasis on grace simply wipe it out?

The law has its own place in the scheme of things. First, it tells men what sin is. If there is no law, a man cannot break it and there can be no such thing as sin. Second, and most important, the law really drives a man to the grace of God. The trouble about the law is that because we are sinful men we can never keep it perfectly. Its effect, therefore, is to show a man his weakness and to drive him to a despair in which he sees that there is nothing left but to throw himself on the mercy and the love of God. The law convinces us of our own insufficiency and in the end compels us to admit that the only thing which can save us is the grace of God. In other words the law is an essential stage on the way to that grace.

In this epistle Paulgreat theme is the glory of the grace of God and the necessity of realizing that we can never save ourselves.

FURTHER READING

Galatians

E. D. Burton, Galatians (ICC; G)

G. S. Duncan, The Epistle to the Galatians (MC; E)

D. Guthrie, Galatians (NCB; E)

J. B. Lightfoot, The Epistle to the Galatians (MmC; G)

Abbreviations

ICC : International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

E: English Text G: Greek Text

Barclay: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

The Days Of Childhood (Gal_4:1-7)

Progress In Reverse (Gal_4:8-11)

Love's Appeal (Gal_4:12-20)

An Old Story And A New Meaning (Gal_4:21-31; Gal_5:1)

Constable: Galatians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical Background

"The most uncontroverted matter in the study of Galatians is that the letter was written by Paul, the Christian apostle whose ministry is portrayed in the Acts of the Apostles."¹

The Apostle Paul directed this epistle to the churches of Galatia (1:2), and he called its recipients Galatians (3:1). However who these people were and where they lived are problems that have proved difficult to pinpoint.

The traditional opinion held that the recipients lived in the geographical district known as Galatia located in the northern part of the Roman province called Galatia in Asia Minor.² This view holds that Paul founded these churches on his second missionary journey after the Spirit forbade him to preach in the province of Asia (Acts 16:6). Paul could have written this epistle then during his third journey either from Ephesus about 54 A.D. or from Corinth about 57 A.D. The main arguments for this "North Galatian theory" are as follows. The popular use of the term "Galatians" usually signified people in this area. Second, Luke normally referred to geographical districts rather than Roman provinces in Acts. Third, there is some similarity between the Galatians as Paul referred to them in this epistle and the Gallic inhabitants of northern Galatia. Fourth, Paul travelled through this region during his second journey (Acts 16:6-8).

The more popular view today maintains that Paul wrote to the churches located in the Roman province of Galatia that he founded on his first missionary journey (cf. Acts 13:38-39, 46, 48; 14:3, 8-10).³ The arguments for this "South Galatian theory" are as follows. Acts 16:6 and 18:23 offer no support to the theory that Paul made a trip to the northern part of provincial Galatia. Second, there is no specific information about the northern Galatian churches in Acts. Third, the geographic isolation of the North Galatia district makes a visit by Paul improbable. Fourth, Paul usually referred to provincial titles in his writings. Fifth, the name "Galatians" was appropriate for the southern area. Sixth, the mention of Barnabas in Galatians 2 suggests that the Galatians had met him. Seventh, the absence of a North Galatian representative in the collection delegation referred to in 1 Corinthians 16:1 implies that it was not an evangelized area. Eighth, the influence of the Judaizers was extensive in South Galatia.

If Paul wrote this epistle to the churches of South Galatia, he probably did so at one of two times. If Paul's visit referred to in Galatians 4:13 is the same one described in Acts 16:6, he must have written this epistle after the Jerusalem Council (i.e., in or after 49 A.D.). Nevertheless it seems more likely that Galatians 4:13 refers to the visit described in Acts 14:21, so Paul must have written before the Jerusalem Council (i.e., before or in 49 A.D.). Assuming the earlier date Paul probably wrote Galatians from Antioch of Syria shortly after his first missionary journey and before the Jerusalem Council.⁴ Another less likely possibility is that he wrote it from Ephesus during his third missionary journey.⁵

The dating of the epistle affects the occasion for writing. Assuming the South Galatian theory and an early date of writing, Paul wrote mainly to stem the tide of Judaizing heresy to which he referred throughout the letter. He mentioned people who opposed him in every chapter (1:6-7; 2:4-5; 3:1; 4:17; 5:7-12; 6:12-13).

The identity of the Judaizers is also important. Their method included discrediting Paul. The first two chapters of Galatians especially deal with criticisms leveled against him personally. His critics appear to have been Jews who claimed to be Christians and who wanted Christians to submit to the authority of the Mosaic Law and its institutions. They probably came from Jerusalem and evidently had a wide influence (cf. Acts 15). One man seems to have been their spokesman (3:1; 5:7, 10) though there were several Judaizers in Galatia as the many references to "them" and "they" scattered throughout the epistle suggest.⁶

Message⁷

Probably the most distinctive impression one receives from this epistle is its severity. Paul wrote it with strong emotion, but he never let his emotions fog his argument. His dominant concern was for truth and its bearing on life.

Compared with the Corinthian correspondence Galatians is also corrective. However the tone is very different. There is no mention here of the readers' standing in Christ or any commendation of them.

The introduction is rather cold and prosaic with no mention of thankfulness. Paul begins at once to marvel at the Galatians' apostasy (1:6-9; cf. 3:1-5; 4:8-11). Even tender sentiments seem to rise from a very troubled heart (4:19-20). Obviously that of which Paul wrote in this letter was of utmost importance to him.

He was not dealing with behavior, as in Corinthians, so much as belief, which is foundational to behavior.

Galatians has been called the Manifesto of Christian Liberty. It explains that liberty: its nature, its laws, and its enemies. This little letter has at various times through history called God's people out of the bondage of legalism back into the liberty of freedom. Luther loved it so much he called it his wife.

The greatest value of this letter is not found in its denunciations but in its enunciations. We must not be so impressed with the fiery rhetoric and dramatic actions of Paul that we fail to understand the reasons underlying what he said and did.

Galatians' central teaching is a proclamation concerning liberty. It is a germinal form of the Epistle to the Romans, which Paul wrote 8 years later in 57 A.D.

Three sentences will state its major revelations.

First, the root of every Christian's Christianity is God's supply of His Holy Spirit to that person (3:5, 14). One receives new life by receiving the Holy Spirit by faith at conversion. Nothing other than faith is necessary for salvation. To affirm that one must be circumcised or baptized to receive life is to proclaim the worst of heresies. New life comes by faith alone. What makes Christians different is God indwelling us.

Second, the culture (medium) in which every Christian's Christianity grows is the desires of God's Spirit who indwells us (5:17). When a Christian has life by faith he or she is free from all other bondage: that of the flesh, and that of rites and ceremonies. (By "flesh" I mean our sinful human nature.) He has power to master the flesh, and he has found life apart from rites and ceremonies, so he is free from these. However, his liberty is not license to sin. God's Spirit enables the Christian to obey. Circumcision or baptism does not make anyone able to obey God. We can only obey God in the power of God's Spirit. In short, we are free to obey God, not to disobey Him, when the Spirit dwells within us. God's life in us bears fruit if we cooperate with Him. But if we conflict with Him it does not.

Third, the fruit that every Christian produces is the evidence of God's Spirit triumphing over his flesh (5:22). The essence of this fruit is love. The works of the flesh are the fruit of a religion that does not have the life-giving Spirit indwelling its members (i.e., ritualism). Fruit issues from life; works issue from ritualism.

The Galatians upset Paul exceedingly because whenever we add anything to faith for salvation inevitably we neglect faith. If we make something beside faith supreme, we establish a rite (e.g., baptism). When we establish a rite, practice of the rite becomes the message of religion and we divorce morality from religion. There is no motivation for righteous living. This is one difference between Christianity and all other religions. All other religions have rites, ceremonies, and creeds, but no life. Consequently there is no vital connection in these religions between belief and morality. We see that all kinds of sin result from the tragedy of adding something to the one responsibility of faith (e.g., Roman Catholicism).

Galatians is not only a proclamation, it is also a protest.

It protests against preachers of another gospel (1:8-9). These words of Paul are not only a curse, they are a statement of fact. One who preaches another gospel substitutes falsehood (which issues finally in the works of the flesh) for the truth (which issues finally in the fruit of the Spirit). Get the gospel straight before you finish your study of Galatians.

Galatians also protests against the receivers of another gospel (5:4). To add to faith is to trust ceremony, which is to deny Christ, which is to be cut off from Christ, which is to fall from grace. Ceremonies such as baptism and the Lord's Supper have a proper place in Christianity, but to make them necessary for justification is to deny Christ. A person is justified only when he or she says sincerely, "Nothing in my hands I bring, Simply to Thy cross I cling."

Galatians also protests against those who practice the deeds of the flesh, which result from a false gospel (5:21). They will not inherit God's kingdom. Their reward will be less than it would be if they did not practice the deeds of the flesh.

This letter warns us against adding any rite or ceremony or observance to faith to obtain God's acceptance. Such a practice cuts off those who rely on the ritual from Christ. Dr. William Culbertson used to say, "It is very hard to tell when the accretions to faith make faith invalid." We all struggle with this difficulty in our evangelism.

It also warns us against changing horses in midstream. That is, it warns us against trusting in faith for justification, but then concluding that the only way to be sanctified is to observe rites, ceremonies, or other observances. Having begun salvation by the Spirit we will not attain God's goal for us by the flesh. The life of the Spirit must remain the law of the Christian.

We may compare the Christian life to a three-stage Saturn rocket.

Here is another way to think of salvation. We can chart it showing the relationships of justification, sanctification, and glorification. Justification is solely an act of God that takes a moment. Sanctification is a joint enterprise between God and the Christian that takes a lifetime. Glorification is another act of God alone that takes only a moment.

I would summarize the message of the book as follows. Salvation is by God's grace through faith plus nothing. We will deal with these issues more in detail in our study of the book.

Outline⁸

I. Introduction 1:1-10

A. Salutation 1:1-5

B. Denunciation 1:6-10

II. Personal defense of Paul's gospel 1:11-2:21

A. Independence from other apostles 1:11-24

1. The source of Paul's gospel 1:11-17

2. The events of Paul's early ministry 1:18-24

B. Interdependence with other apostles 2:1-10

C. Correction of another apostle 2:11-21

III. Theological affirmation of salvation by faith 3:1-4:31

A. Vindication of the doctrine ch. 3

1. The experiential argument 3:1-5

2. The Scriptural argument 3:6-14

3. The logical argument 3:15-29

B. Clarification of the doctrine ch. 4

1. The domestic illustration 4:1-11

2. The historical illustration 4:12-20

3. The biblical illustration 4:21-31

IV. Practical application to Christian living 5:1-6:10

A. Balance in the Christian life ch. 5

1. Living without the Law 5:1-12

2. Living without license 5:13-15

3. Living by the Holy Spirit 5:16-26

B. Responsibilities of the Christian life 6:1-10

1. Toward sinning Christians 6:1

2. Toward burdened Christians 6:2-5

3. Toward teachers 6:6-9

4. Toward all people 6:10

V. Conclusion 6:11-18

Constable: Galatians

Galatians

Bibliography

Allen, Kenneth W. "Justification by Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:538 (April-June 1978):109-16.

Andrews, Mary E. "Paul and Repentance." Journal of Biblical Literature 54:2 (June 1935):125.

Barclay, William. The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians. Daily Study Bible series, 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barrett, C. K. Freedom and Obligation. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985.

Bauckham, Richard. "Barnabas in Galatians." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2 (January 1979):61-70.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Betz, H. D. Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia. Hermeneia series. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Blass, F., and Debrunner, A. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Translated and edited by Robert W. Funk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Blauvelt, Livingston, Jr. "Does the Bible Teach Lordship Salvation?" Bibliotheca Sacra 143:569 (January--March 1986):37-45.

Boice, James Montgomery. "Galatians." In Romans-Galatians. Vol. 10 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Bornkamm, Gunther. Paul. New York: Harper and Row, 1971.

Brown, J. An Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians. Marshallton, Del.: Sovereign Grace, 1970.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Burton, Ernest deWitt. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians. International Critical Commentary series. Reprint ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1964.

Caird, George Bradford. Principalities and Powers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics series. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Reprint ed., Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Donald K. "Galatians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 587-612. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Grace. 1922. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academic Books, n. d.

_____. Salvation. Philadelphia: Sunday School Times, 1926.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Chismar, Douglas E. and Raush, David A. "Regarding Theonomy: An Essay of Concern." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:3 (September 1984):315-23.

Clapp, Rodney. "Democracy as Heresy." Christianity Today 31:3 (February 20, 1987):17-23.

Cole, R. Alan. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976.

The Confession of Faith; the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, with the Scripture Proofs at Large. Reprint ed. Inverness, Scotland: Free Presbyterian Publications, 1981.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Cosgrove, Charles H. "The Law Has Given Sarah No Children." Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):219-35.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

De Haan, M. R. Galatians. Grand Rapids: Radio Bible Class, 1960.

DeMar, Gary. The Debate Over Christian Reconstruction. Fort Worth: Dominion Press, 1988.

Denney, James. The Death of Christ. 4th ed. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1913.

Dickason, C. Fred. From Bondage to Freedom. Moody Manna series. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1963.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Galatians, Epistle to the," by F. S. Marsh.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Galatians, Epistle to the," by Marcus Dods.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Eadie, John. Commentary on the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1884; reprint ed., Minneapolis: James and Klock Christian Publishing Co., 1977.

Ellicott, Charles J. A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, with a Revised Translation. Andover, Mass.: Warren F. Draper, 1896.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Fuller, David P. "Paul and Galatians 3:28." Theological Students Fellowship Bulletin 9:2 (November-December 1985):9-13.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Biblical Feminism and Church Leadership." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:557 (January-March 1983):55-63.

George, Timothy. Galatians. New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gunn, James D. G. "Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law (Galatians 3.10-14)." New Testament StudiesNew Testament Studies 31:4 (October 1985):523-42.

Guthrie, Donald. Galatians. New Century Bible Commentary series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott Publishers, Ltd., 1981.

_____. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Hamerton-Kelly, R. G. "Sacred Violence and Works of Law.' Is Christ Then an Agent of Sin?' (Galatians 2:17)." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):55-75.

Harrison, Everett F. "The Epistle to the Galatians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1283-99. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Galatians and Exposition of Ephesians. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.

Hennecke, E., and Schneemelcher, W., eds. New Testament Apocraypha. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1964.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Leslie F. Church. 1 vol. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1985.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Duration of The Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Hofius, O. "Gal 1:18: historesai Kephan." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 75 (1984):73-84.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

House, H. Wayne. "Neither . . . Male nor Female . . . in Christ Jesus.'" Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):47-56.

Ice, Thomas D. "An Evaluation of Theonomic Neopostmillennialism." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:579 (July-September 1988):281-300.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Galatians, Epistle to the," by George G. Findlay.

Ironside, Harry A. Expository Messages on the Epistle to the Galatians. Reprint ed. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1975.

Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, A. R.; and Brown, David. Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jewett, Paul K. Man as Male and Female. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975.

Jewett, Robert. Dating Paul's Life. London: SCM Press, 1979.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "Paul and The Israel of God:' An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 181-96. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Kelly, William. Lectures on the Epistle of Paul, the Apostle, to the Galatians, with a New Translation. London: G. Morrish, n.d.

Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1981.

Kitchens, Ted G. "Perimeters of Corrective Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):201-13.

Kline, Meredith G. "Comments on an Old-New Error." Westminster Theological Journal 41:1 (Fall 1978):172-89.

Knox, John. "On the Meaning of Galatians 1:15." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):301-4.

Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):353-64.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 11: Galatians-Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braune, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starbuck, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lea, Thomas D. and Griffin, Hayne P., Jr. 1, 2 Timothy, Titus. New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians to the Ephesians and to the Philippians. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lightfoot, J. B. The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974.

Lightner, Robert P. "Theological Perspectives on Theonomy." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:569 (January-March 1986):26-36; 570 (April-June 1986):134-45; 571 (July-September 1986):228-45.

Litfin, A. Duane. "Evangelical Feminism: Why Traditionalists Reject It." Bibliotheca Sacra 136:543 (July-September 1979):259-71.

Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1990.

Lowery, David K. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Lull, David J. "The Law Was Our Pedagogue': A Study of Galatians 3:19-25." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):481-98.

Lyttelton, George. Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of Saint Paul. 1769. Reprint ed. Philadelphia: Monarch, 1895.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Matzat, Don. Christ-Esteem. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 1990.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Morgado, Joe, Jr. "Paul in Jerusalem: A Comparison of His Visits in Acts and Galatians." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:1 (March 1994):55-68.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. Galatians: Paul's Charter of Christian Freedom. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

Munck, J. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. Richmond: John Knox Press, 1959.

O'Brien, Peter Thomas. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. Supplements to Novum Testamentum series. Vol. 49. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977.

Ogg, George. The Chronology of the Life of Paul. London: Epworth Press, 1968.

Oldham, Roger Singleton. "Positional and Functional Equality: An Appraisal of the Major Arguments for the Ordination of Women." Mid-America Theological Journal 9:2 (Fall 1985):1-29.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Pattern for Maturity. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

_____. "The Purpose of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra. 128:511 (July-September 1971):227-33.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Pyne, Robert A. "Dependence and Duty: The Spiritual Life in Galatians 5 and Romans 6." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 144-56. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. "The Seed,' the Spirit, and the Blessing of Abraham." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):211-22.

Rackham, Richard Belward. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster Commentaries series. 9th ed. London: Methuen Co., 1922.

Raisanen, Heikki. "Galatians 2.16 and Paul's Break with Judaism." New Testament Studies 31(October 1985):543-53.

Ramsay, William M. A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1899.

_____. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960.

Richardson, Peter. Israel in the Apostolic Church. Society for New Testament Studies monograph series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.

Ridderbos, Herman N. The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia. Translated by Henry Zylstra. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rosscup, James E. "Fruit in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:497 (January-March 1968):56-66.

Russell, Walter Bo, III. "Does the Christian Have Flesh' in Gal 5:13-26?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:2 (June 1993):179-87.

_____. "Rhetorical Analysis of the Book of Galatians, Part 1." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:599 (July-September 1993):341-58.

_____. "Rhetorical Analysis of the Book of Galatians, Part 2." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):416-39.

_____. "Who Were Paul's Opponents in Galatia?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September 1990):329-50.

Ryrie, Charles C. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. "Contrasting Views on Sanctification." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 189-200. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):239-47.

_____. The Grace of God. Chicago: Moody Press, 1963.

_____. So Great Salvation: What It Means to Believe In Jesus Christ. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

_____. "What Is Spirituality?" Bibliotheca Sacra 126:503 (July-September 1969):204-13.

Sampley, J. P. "Before God, I do not lie' (Gal. i.20): Paul's Self-Defence in the Light of Roman Legal Praxis." New Testament Studies 23 (1976-77):477-82.

Sanders, E. P. Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "Sinners' Who Are Forgiven or Saints' Who Sin?" Biblitheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):400-12.

Scanzoni, Letha and Hardesty, Nancy. All We're Meant to Be. Waco: Word Books, 1974.

Schmithals, Walter. Paul and James. Translated by Dorthea M. Barton. Number 46 in the Studies in Biblical Theological series. Naperville, Il.: Alec R. Allenson Inc., 1965.

Schnackenburg, R. "Apostles before and during Paul's Time." In Apostolic History and the Gospel, pp. 287-303. Edited by W. Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970.

Schreiner, Thomas R. "The Church as the New Israel and the Future of Ethnic Israel." Studia Biblica et Theologica 13:1 (April 1983):17-38.

Schweizer, E. "Slaves of the Elements and Worshippers of Angels: Gal 4:3, 9 and Col 2:8, 18, 20." Journal of Biblical Literature 107 (1988):455-68.

Smith, Jay E. "Can Fallen Leaders Be Restored to Leadership? Bibliotheca Sacra 151:604 (October-December 1994):455-80.

Stott, John R. W. Only One Way: The Message of Galatians. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1968.

Strickland, Wayne G. "Preunderstanding and Daniel Fuller's Law-Gospel Continuum." Bibliotheca Sacra 144:574 (April-June 1987):181-93.

Swete, Henry Barclay. The Holy Spirit in the New Testament. London: Macmillan and Co., 1909.

Tenney, Merrill C. Galatians: The Charter of Christian Liberty. Revised and enlarged ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Thatcher, Tom. "The Plot of Gal 3:1-18." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997): 401-10.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "abba," by G. Kittel.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. Grace and Power. Reprint ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "The Chronological Problem of Galatians 2:1-10." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):334-40.

_____. "The Contrast between the Spiritual Conflict in Romans 7 and Galatians 5." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:492 (October-December 1966):310-14.

Towns, Elmer L. "Martin Luther on Sanctification." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:502 (April-June 1969):115-22.

Tozer, A. W. "Total Commitment." Decision 4:8 (August 1963):4.

Vidler, A. R. Christ's Strange Work. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1994.

Wedderburn, A. J. M. "Some Observations on Paul's Use of the Phrases In Christ' and With Christ.'" Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25 (October 1985):83-97.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Free. BE Books series. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1976.

Wilkin, Bob. "Galatians 5:19-21: Who Will Inherit the Kingdom?" Grace Evangelical Society Newsletter (December 1987), p. 2.

_____. "Sow for It! Reaping Abundant Eternal Life as a Reward (Galatians 6:8-9)." Grace Evangelical Society News 5:8 (August 1990):2.

Williams, Sam K. "Justification and the Spirit in Galatians." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29 (February 1987):91-100.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Galatians (Book Introduction)

THE

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE GALATIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

The Galatians, soon after St. Paul had preached the gospel to them, were seduced by some false teachers, who had been Jews, and who were for obliging all Christians, even those who had been Gentiles, to observe circumcision, and the other ceremonies of the Mosaical law. In this epistle he refutes the pernicious doctrine of those teachers, and also their calumny against his mission and apostleship. The subject matter of this epistle is much the same as of that to the Romans. It was written at Ephesus, about twenty-three years after our Lord's ascension. (Challoner) --- The Galatians were originally Gauls, who under their leader, Baennus, spread themselves over Greece, and at length passed over into Asia Minor, where they settled between Cappadocia and Phrygia, in the province afterwards called from them Galatia. It seems that St. Peter preached first in those parts; but it was only to the Jews, as my be gathered from the inscription of his first epistle, which he addresses to the Jews of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. But St. Paul was the first that preached to the Gentile inhabitants of this province. When he first preached to them, he was received as an angel from heaven, or rather, as Christ himself: he visited them oftener than once, and the Church he there formed was very considerable. It was the Jewish converts of Galatia (who, as we have before mentioned, were the spiritual children of St. Peter) that caused those troubles which gave rise to this epistle. They strongly advocated the legal observances; and making a handle of the high pre-eminence of St. Peter, they decried St. Paul, even calling in question his apostleship. They taught the necessity of circumcision, and other Mosaic rites, which the apostles then in part retained. Thus divisions were raised in this infant Church. On these accounts the apostle warmly asserts his apostleship, as being called by Christ himself. He shews that his doctrine was that of the other apostles, who, in the council of Jerusalem, four years before, testified their exemption from the legal observances. He teaches, that it is not by the law, but by faith, that the blessings of salvation are imparted to them. After establishing these more important parts of the epistle, he gives them instruction on various heads. The Greek subscription to this epistle informs us, that it was written from Rome. St. Jerome says, he wrote it when in chains. Theodoret says, it was the first epistle that St. Paul wrote from Rome. This opinion has probably been adopted from a mistaken interpretation of the text: I bear the marks of the wounds of Christ in my body. By these marks they understand chains, whilst the text equally applies to the mortifications and self-denials of a Christian. The contrary opinion is, that this epistle was written from Ephesus in the year of Christ 55. This is the more probable opinion, and is maintained by St. Gregory the Great, Ludovicus, Capellanus, Estius, Usher, Pearson, and many others. The authority of the Greek copies, in assigning the places whence the letters were written, has been long rejected by the learned. We find no such information in the more ancient Greek manuscripts of St. Germanus and Clermont, &c. (Calmet)

====================

Gill: Galatians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO GALATIANS

The persons to whom this epistle is written were not such who made up a single church only, in some certain town or city, but were such of which several churches consisted, in a region or country called Galatia, as is evident from Gal 1:2 and the members of these churches seem to be chiefly, if not altogether Jews, since the apostle includes them with himself; as having been under the law, under tutors and governors, and in bondage under the elements of the world, and to whom the law had been a schoolmaster, though now they were no longer under it as such, Gal 3:23 or however, though some of them might have been originally Gentiles, yet, previous to their conversion, had become proselytes to the Jews, and now were returning to Judaism again, as appears from Gal 4:8. When and from whence this epistle was written, is not very clear and manifest: some have thought, that it was written about the time of the writing of the epistle to the Romans, and upon a like occasion; but if it was written about that time, it could not he written from Rome, as the subscription to this epistle attests, since it is certain, that when the apostle wrote his epistle to the Romans, he had never, as yet, been at Rome. Beza is of opinion, that it was written from Antioch, between the return of Paul and Barnabas thither from their first journey, and the troubles which broke out in that church, Act 14:28. But to this it is reasonably objected, that it is questionable whether there were so early any churches in Galatia at all; and if there were, it does not seem that the defection from the faith, complained of in this epistle, as yet had took place in any of the churches; for it was after this date that the troubles upon this head arose at Antioch, which seems to have been the first place, and the church there the first church the judaizing teachers practised at and upon. Some Latin exemplars testify that it was written from Ephesus; of which opinion was Erasmus; but as Dr. Lightfoot observes, the same reason is against this as the former, seeing the corruption that was got into this church was then but beginning, when the apostle was at Ephesus: it seems therefore most likely, that it was written from Rome, as the subscription in the Greek copies affirms; and which is strengthened by the Syriac and Arabic versions, seeing it seems to have been written after the apostle had made the collections, in several places, for the poor saints at Jerusalem, Gal 2:10 and when the apostasy from the faith had got to a great pitch; nor is it any objection that there is no express mention made of his bonds in it, as there is in those epistles of his, which were written from Rome; since, when he wrote this, he might have been delivered from them, as some have thought he was after his first defence; and besides, he does take notice of the marks of the Lord Jesus he bore in his body, Gal 6:17. Dr. Lightfoot places the writing of this epistle in the year and in the "fifth" of Nero; some place it in 55, and others in 58. That there were churches in Galatia very early, is certain from Act 18:23 but by whom they were planted is not so evident; very likely by the apostle, since, it is certain, both from this epistle, that he was personally in this country, and preached the Gospel here, Gal 4:13 and from Act 16:6 and if he was not the instrument of the conversion of the first of them, which laid the foundation of a Gospel church state, yet it is certain, that he was useful in strengthening the disciples and brethren throughout this country, Act 18:23. But after his departure from them, the false teachers got among them, and insinuated, that he was no apostle, at least that he was inferior to Peter, James, and John, the ministers of the circumcision; and these seduced many of the members of the churches in this place, drawing them off from the evangelical doctrine of justification by the righteousness of Christ, persuading them that the observation of the ceremonial law, particularly circumcision, was necessary to their acceptance with God, and justification in his sight: wherefore the occasion and design of this epistle were to vindicate the character of the apostle as such; to establish the true doctrine of justification by faith, in opposition to the works of the law; to recover those who were carried away with the other doctrines; to exhort the saints to stand fast in the liberty of Christ, and to various other duties of religion; and to give a true description of the false teachers, and their views, that so they might beware of them, and of their principles.

Gill: Galatians 4 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO GALATIANS 4

In this chapter the apostle discourses concerning the abrogation of the ceremonial law, under which the Old Testament saints were, being as children under tutors; blames the Galatians for returning to it when they were freed from it; puts them in mind of their former affection to him and to his ministry; describes the false apostles, who had been the occasion of their departure from the truth, and by a beautiful allegory sets forth the difference between the legal and Gospel dispensations. And whereas in the latter part of the preceding chapter he had compared the law to a schoolmaster, under which the Jews were till Christ came; he here makes use of another simile to express the same thing by, which is that of an heir while under age being under tutors and governors, until the time fixed by the parent's will, Gal 4:1 an accommodation of which simile is in Gal 4:3, by which the Jews under the former dispensation are represented as children, and as in a state of bondage to the ceremonial law, from which there is a deliverance by Christ at the appointed time of the Father, by whom he was sent for that purpose; the act of sending is ascribed to God the Father; the person sent is described as the Son of God; the time when is called the fulness of time; and the circumstances under which he was sent were, that he was made of a woman, and made under the law, Gal 4:4, the ends of his being sent were to redeem his people from it, who were under it; and that they might receive the adoption of children, the privilege and spirit of it, Gal 4:5. Hence because they were the sons of God, and as a fruit and effect of the redemption of them by Christ, the Spirit of God is sent down into their hearts, to make known and witness their adoption, Gal 4:6, and the benefits arising from hence are, that such are or should be no longer the servants of the law, but are children and free from it, and are heirs of God, Gal 4:7, and that the grace of God might appear the more illustrious in this privilege of sonship, and the folly of the Galatians be more manifest in returning to the ceremonial law, notice is taken of what they were and did before conversion, and what they were inclined to now; that whereas whilst they were ignorant of God, they served nominal fictitious deities, such as were not by nature gods; and yet now, though they knew God, and were known of him, seemed desirous of being in a state of servitude and bondage to the weak and beggarly elements of the ceremonial law, Gal 4:8, of which instances are given in their observing days, months, times and years, Gal 4:10, which gave the apostle a great deal of concern, fearing his labour among them was in vain, and to no purpose, Gal 4:11, wherefore he entreats them as his brethren to imitate him, who being a Jew, yet had relinquished the observation of the ceremonial law, Gal 4:12, and then he reminds them of their former regard unto him; how that though he preached the Gospel to them through much weakness, yet they did not despise him and reject him on account of his infirmities, but received him with all the tokens of respect imaginable, as if he had been an angel; yea, as if he had been Christ himself, Gal 4:13, who then reckoned themselves happy persons on account of the Gospel he preached to them, and then had such an affection for him, that if it had been needful they would have given their eyes unto him; and yet now he was become their enemy for preaching the same truths he did then, justification by faith in Christ's righteousness and the abrogation of the law, Gal 4:15, next he gives an account of the false apostles, who pretended a zealous affection for the Galatians; which was not a good one, nor with right views, Gal 4:17, though zeal in a good cause, and which continues, is very commendable, Gal 4:18, and such a constant and hearty attachment had the apostle to them; wherefore he calls them his little children, says he travailed in birth on their account, it being his earnest desire that Christ might appear to be formed in them, Gal 4:19, wherefore since he was in doubt and distress about them, he was very desirous of being with them, and to alter his way of arguing with them; and from the law, and not the Gospel, show them their mistake and folly, Gal 4:20, which he does in the following allegorical way, by observing that Abraham had two sons, the one by a servant maid, the other by his lawful wife; the one was after the flesh, the other by promise; which allegorically signified the two covenants of Sinai and of Sion, Gal 4:22. Agar the bondmaid represented the covenant made at Mount Sinai in Arabia, under which the carnal Jews and their posterity were in a state of bondage; and Sarah the free woman, the covenant of grace under the Gospel dispensation and the Gospel church state, which is from above, free, fertile, and numerous, Gal 4:25, which is confirmed, Gal 4:27, by a passage out of Isa 44:1 and as these two women were typical of the two covenants, so their respective offspring represented the two sorts of professors, legalists and evangelical Christians. True believers in Christ are like Isaac, the children of the promise; legalists are like Ishmael, men after the flesh, and of the same persecuting spirit with him: wherefore as it was then, that carnal Ishmael persecuted spiritual Isaac, so at this time the carnal Jews persecuted the real Christians, Gal 4:28 nevertheless for the comfort of the latter, it is observed out of the Scripture that the former shall be cast out, and not be heir with them, Gal 4:30, and the conclusion of the whole is, that the saints under the Gospel dispensation are not in bondage to the law, but are made free by Christ; to which freedom they are called, and in which they should stand, Gal 4:31.

College: Galatians (Book Introduction)

FOREWORD

Since the earliest days of the concept of a commentary series jointly authored by church of Christ and Christian church scholars, I have eagerly anticipated the College Press NIV Bible Commentary. The dream of Don DeWelt was to bring brothers back together in a project honoring our common devotion to Scripture. Exegesis of the text should know no party line, but should interpret fairly and honestly what God said. Participating as a writer in this series is an honor and a challenge.

Having taught Galatians and Ephesians for twenty years in the Bible college classroom, I know that many good commentaries already exist. All the books that have been written provide a wonderful platform on which to build. No quantity of footnotes could adequately reflect my gratitude for the research of great scholars of the past.

I especially want to express my thanks to my family and my co-workers in Christ for the support and inspiration they have given me. Experience is teaching me that no member of the Lord's body functions well alone. In addition, I feel gratitude to a host of zealous students who have brought their enthusiasm and fresh insights to the halls of Ozark Christian College. Learning from students is one of the best ways to learn!

Out of my study of Galatians and Ephesians, I have learned to love the Lord and his people. Viewing God's children as my dear brothers and sisters is a rich blessing. Especially dear to me are the precious saints of God whose love has reached beyond the sectarian lines. Yearning to taste the freedom for which Christ has set us free, they have dared to love with God's own love. Out of their sincere faith and unfeigned love, it is possible to catch a glimpse of heaven. Until the family is reunited around the throne, may God bless you.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

INTRODUCTION

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free (Gal 5:1). This freedom rings out in every page of Galatians, Paul's great "Magna Charta of the Christian faith." This epistle is our charter of Christian freedom, our declaration of independence from slavery

to the law.

Throughout the history of the church the message of Galatians has been needed to free men from chains of false doctrine. When the early Judaizers tried to bind men to the old commandments from Sinai, Galatians set them free. When the apostate church of the Dark Ages tried to bind men to a papal system of salvation by penance and works, Galatians set them free. When modern legalists try to bind us to a joyless religion of superior "rightness," Galatians sets us free.

Martin Luther was moved by Galatians to sound the reveille of the Reformation. He said, "The Epistle to the Galatians is my epistle; I have betrothed myself to it: it is my wife." His commentary on Galatians cost him more labor, and was more highly esteemed by him, than any of his other works. For Luther, as for every age, the simple gospel of the message of Galatians was a mighty weapon in the arsenal of freedom.

THE WRITER

No epistle can lay more claim to being a genuine product of the hand of Paul than can Galatians. As Kümmel says, "That Galatians is a genuine, authentic Epistle is indisputable." Paul claims to be the author (1:1 and 5:2), and the early church accepted this claim without reservation. The style and message are clearly Pauline. "His mind, character, and accents are to be seen in every paragraph."

THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

While the authorship is beyond dispute, there is considerable controversy regarding the recipients of this letter. They are called "the churches in Galatia," but just what is meant by this?

During the third century B.C. some barbarian people of Celtic origin migrated to the inner plateau of Asia Minor and established a kingdom there. Since some of the Celtic people were known in France as the Gauls, these people in Asia Minor were distinguished as the "Gallo-Graecians," from which the name "Galatians" comes.Their realm was centered around Ancyra (the modern capital of Turkey) in the northern highlands area.

After the Romans conquered this territory, it was combined in 25 B.C. into a large province containing the districts to the south, Lycaonia and Isauria, as well as parts of Pisidia and Phrygia. The newly created province was called Galatia, and included the cities known to us from Paul's missionary journeys - Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra.

When Paul spoke of "Galatia," did he refer to ethnic Galatia (the tribal area limited to the north), or did he refer to political Galatia (the province which also included the districts to the south)? The traditional view, still shown on most Bible maps, is the "north Galatian theory." The view favored by most commentaries today is the "south Galatian theory."

The North Galatian Theory

If this view is correct, then Paul must have visited Galatia on the second missionary journey (Acts 16:6, although without preaching) and started churches there on the third missionary journey (Acts 18:23). However, Acts says nothing of the cities there, nor of Paul's preaching.

Possible arguments to support the "North Galatian theory" include the following:

1. "Galatia" meant a place inhabited specifically by the Gauls.

2. In Acts, Antioch is called "Pisidian," while Lystra and Derbe are cities of Lycaonia.

3. The Phrygians would have objected to being called Galatians, since it would remind them of their subjection to Rome.

4. Paul could not have addressed Lycaonians or Pisidians as "O foolish Galatians."

5. The fickle nature of the recipients suits the Gallic people.

6. "The region of Phrygia and Galatia" (Acts 16:6) appears to mean that Galatia was quite distinct from Phrygia.

7. There is no mention in Galatians that Paul experienced strong opposition when he preached there.

The South Galatian Theory

In the 1880s and 1890s William Ramsay did extensive archaeological work in Asia Minor. His careful research not only proved that Luke was an accurate historian; it also laid the foundation for the "south Galatian theory." This is the view favored in this commentary.

If this view is correct, then Paul visited cities of Galatia on all three of his missionary journeys. These were among the first churches he started. The cities would include Pisidian Antioch and Iconium (where Paul met resistance from the Jews), and Lystra (where Paul was first welcomed, and then stoned).

Possible arguments to support the "south Galatian theory" include the following:

1. If Galatia does not include the cities of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, then we know absolutely nothing about the churches which were so important in Paul's life and to which such an important epistle was sent.

2. The expression "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" (Acts 16:6) is best understood as the area through which Paul would go when he left Lystra and Iconium, "the Phrygio-Galatian" territory.

3. Paul normally uses Roman imperial names for the provinces, and the Roman "Galatia" included the south.

4. "Galatians" was the only word available that would include the people of all four cities (just as "British" includes people who are Welsh, Scottish, and English).

5. "The Galatian churches" participated in the collection for the saints in Jerusalem (1 Cor 16:1), and Paul's assistants included

two South Galatians - Gaius of Derbe and Timothy of Lystra (Acts 20:4).

6. The northern area was not on the common trade routes, and it is unlikely that Paul would have made a difficult journey to reach such an out-of-the-way place "because of an illness" (Gal 4:13).

7. Judaizers are known to have followed Paul through the cities of the south.

8. Paul's words "you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God" (4:14) could be connected with his reception at Lystra, where they wanted to worship him and Barnabas.

9. The early church developed along the great trade routes, and these went through the south parts of Galatia, not the north.

10. Barnabas is mentioned three times (2:1, 9, 13), as though he is known to the readers, and he accompanied Paul only on the journey that went to the cities of the south.

THE DATE AND PLACE OF WRITING

The date and place of writing are somewhat dependent on the choice of north or south Galatia as the destination. If the "north Galatian theory" is correct, the epistle could not have been written until after Paul arrived in Ephesus on the third missionary journey (Acts 18:23-24). This would produce a date no earlier than A.D. 52-55. Lightfoot proposed that the letter was written from Corinth, perhaps A.D. 56-57.

If one is convinced that the "south Galatian theory" is correct, a much wider range of dates is possible. Galatians could have been written as early as A.D. 48, even before the Jerusalem Conference.However, as our discussion of Gal 2:1-10 will show, it is more likely that the Jerusalem Conference had already taken place when Paul wrote the letter. This would move the probable date to A.D. 50 or later. It is likely that Galatians stands among the first of Paul's epistles.

The decision about the date and place of writing does not affect the interpretation of Galatians; in fact, the reverse is true. The exegesis of the text determines the decision about date and place. One cannot say, "Paul wrote at such and such a date; therefore, the text means this." Our decision about date and place comes from indications in the text itself (Gal 1:6 "so quickly deserting"; 2:1 "fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem"; 2:11 "when Peter came to Antioch"; 4:13 "because of an illness I first preached to you"; 4:20 "I wish I could be with you now.") What we know for certain about Paul's circumstances we will learn from the text.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barclay, William. Flesh and Spirit . Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962.

. The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians . Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1958.

. The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians . Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

. New Testament Words . London: SCM Press, 1964.

Bartchy, S. Scott. First Century Slavery and 1 Corinthians 7:21 . Atlanta: Scholar's Press, 1973.

Barrett, C. K. "The Allegory of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar in the Argument of Galatians," Rechtfertigung: Festschrift fur Ernst Käsemann . Tübingen/Gottingen, 1976.

Barth, Markus. Romans . Oxford: University Press, 1980 (reprint).

Bauckham, R. J. "Barnabas in Galatians." Journal for the Study of the New Testament , Issue 2 (1979) 61-70.

Bauer, Walter; William F. Arndt; and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . 2nd ed. Rev. by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Blakely, Given. What the Bible Says About the Kingdom of God . Joplin: College Press, 1988.

Blass, F.; A. Debrunner; and Robert W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Boice, James Montgomery. Galatians . The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Brandenburger, Egon. "Cross," Dictionary of New Testament Theology (1975) I:391-403.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians (NIGTC). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Büchsel, Friedrich. "ajllhgorevw," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1964) I:260-263.

Bundrick, David R. "TA STOICHEIA TOU KOSMOU," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 34 (Sept 1991) 353-364.

Burton, E. D. The Epistle to the Galatians (ICC). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1921.

Carson, D. A.; Douglas J. Moo; and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Calvin, John. Commentary on Galatians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961 (reprint).

Cullmann, Oskar. "Pevtro", Khfa'"," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1968) VI:100-112.

Dana, H. E. and Julius R. Mantey. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament . New York: Macmillan, 1955.

Deissmann, Adolph. Light from the Ancient East (Eng. Trans.). New York: Harper, 1927.

DeVries, C. E. "Paul's 'Cutting' Remarks about a Race: Galatians 5:1-12," Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Duncan, George S. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (MNTC). London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1934.

Fairweather, William. The Background of the Epistles . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1935.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians (NICNT). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Green, Michael. The Empty Cross of Jesus . Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1984.

Guthrie, Donald. Galatians (NCBC). London: Oliphants, 1969; revised edition 1974.

Hauck, Friedrich and Siegfried Schulz. "pornhv," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1968) VI:579-595.

Holly, David. A Complete Categorized Greek-English New Testament Vocabulary . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980.

Howard, George. Paul: Crisis in Galatia (SNTSM 35). Cambridge: University Press, 1979.

Hurtado, L. W. "The Jerusalem Collection and the Book of Galatians," Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Issue 2 (Oct. 1979) 53.

Jewett, Robert. "Agitators and the Galatian Congregation," New Testament Studies 17 (1970-1971) 198-212.

Johnson, Robert L. The Letter of Paul to the Galatians (LWC). Austin: R. B. Sweet, 1969.

Lewis, C. S. The Four Loves . San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971 (reprint).

Liddell, Henry George; Robert Scott; and Henry Stuart Jones. A Greek English Lexicon . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968.

Lightfoot, J. B. The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957 (reprint).

Lohse, Eduard. "proswpolhmyiva," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1968) VI:779-780.

Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians (WBC). Dallas: Word, 1990.

Matera, Frank J. Galatians (Sacra Pagina). Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992.

McCasland, S. Vernon. "The Greco-Roman World," The Interpreter's Bible Vol. 7, pp. 75-99. New York: Abingdon, 1951.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament . London: United Bible Societies, 1971.

Michaelis, Wilhelm. "pavqhma," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1967) V:930-935.

Moule, C. F. D. Worship in the New Testament . Richmond: John Knox Press, 1961.

Moulton, James Hope. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Moulton, W. F. and A. S. Geden. A Concordance to the Greek Testament . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Müller, Dietrich. "Apostle," Dictionary of New Testament Theology (1975) I:126-135.

Parker, Pierson. "Once More, Acts and Galatians." Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967) 175-180.

Pinnock, Clark H. Truth on Fire: The Message of Galatians . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1972.

Oepke, A. "mesivth"," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1967) IV:598-624.

Ramsay, W. M. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1949 (reprint).

Ridderbos, Herman N. The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (NICNT). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

Sampley, J. Paul. "'Before God, I do not lie' (Gal 1:20): Paul's Self-Defence in the Light of Roman Legal Praxis." New Testament Studies 23 (1977) 477-482.

Stauffer, Ethelbert. "ajgapavw," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1964) I:35-55.

Stein, Robert H. "Wine-Drinking in New Testament Times," Christianity Today (June 20, 1975) 9-11.

Stott, J. R. W. The Message of Galatians . Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1968.

Strelan, J. G. "Burden-Bearing and the Law of Christ: A Re-examination of Galatians 6:2," Journal of Biblical Literature 94 (1975) 266-276.

Stumpff, Albrecht. "zh'lo"," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1964) II:877-888.

Trench, R. C. Synonyms of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1953 (reprint).

Vine, W. E. An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words . Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1940.

Weiss, Konrad. "crhstov"," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1974) IX:483-492.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

BAGD Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich-Danker Greek Lexicon (2nd. ed.)

BDF Blass-Debrunner-Funk Greek Grammar

CT Christianity Today

ExpT Expository Times

DNTT Dictionary of the New Testament, by Colin Brown

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JSNT Journal of Studies for the New Testament

JTS Journal of Theological Studies

KJV King James Version

LSJ Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek Lexicon

LXX Septuagint

NEB New English Bible

NRSV New Revised Standard Version

NTS New Testament Studies

RSV Revised Standard Version

TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by

Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich

TEV Today's English Version

TrinJ Trinity Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Galatians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. AUTHORITY: The Apostolic Gospel - 1:1-2:21

A. Greeting - 1:1-5

B. Paul's Astonishment - 1:6-10

C. Paul's Call by God - 1:11-17

D. Paul's Brief Meeting with Leaders - 1:18-24

E. Showdown: Conference in Jerusalem - 2:1-5

F. Apostolic Agreement - 2:6-10

G. Showdown: Conflict in Antioch - 2:11-14

H. Apostolic Conclusion - 2:15-21

II. ARGUMENTS: Law Vs. Faith - 3:1-4:31

A. Argument One: Receiving the Spirit - 3:1-5

B. Argument Two: Abraham - 3:6-9

C. Argument Three: The Curse - 3:10-14

D. Argument Four: A Human Covenant - 3:15-22

E. Argument Five: The Child-Keeper - 3:23-4:7

1. The Job of the Child-Keeper - 3:23-25

2. The Benefits for the Children - 3:26-29

3. The Full Rights of the Children - 4:1-7

4. The Folly of Turning Back - 4:8-11

F. Argument Six: Paul's Personal Plea - 4:12-20

1. Paul's Former Welcome - 4:12-16

2. Paul's Present Pains - 4:17-20

G. Argument Seven: Allegory of Hagar & Sarah - 4:21-31

III. APPLICATION: Living for Freedom - 5:1-6:18

A. Freedom or a Yoke? - 5:1-6

B. The Yeast of the Agitators - 5:7-12

C. The Essence of Law and Love - 5:13-15

D. The Acts of the Sinful Nature - 5:16-21

E. The Fruit of the Spirit - 5:22-26

F. The Law of Christ - 6:1-6

G. The Harvest of the Spirit - 6:7-10

H. Paul's Own Conclusion - 6:11-18

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV