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.¹⁵³Paul 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 captivityand thus takes up a theme from what precedes. The second [vv. 28-30] makes a statement about the freedomof the believer in preparation for what is to come."¹⁵⁴

 The biblical story 4:21-23

4:21 Paul challenged his readers, who claimed to value the Law so highly, to consider what it taught. He chose his lesson from Genesis, a book in the "Law"section of the Old Testament. Thus he used the term "law"to refer to two different things in this verse: the Mosaic Law and the Old Testament. Again Paul returned to Abraham, the founder of Judaism.

4:22-23 He pointed out two contrasts between Ishmael and Isaac. First, Ishmael's mother was a slave, but Isaac's mother was free. These conditions affected the status of their sons in Abraham's household. Second, Ishmael was born naturally, but Isaac was born supernaturally in answer to God's promise.

"In the scriptural record of the birth of these two sons of Abraham Paul recognizes the same opposition between reliance on self (according to the flesh') and reliance on God (through promise') as exists between those who would be justified by legal works and those who are justified by faith."¹⁵⁵

 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.¹⁵⁸Another 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.

 The practical application 4:28-31

4:28 Paul drew three applications from his interpretation. First, Christians are similar to Isaac in that they experience a supernatural birth and are part of the fulfillment of God's promise. Therefore they should not live as enslaved sons.

4:29 Second, so-called brethren whose origin is different from our own persecute believers, as Ishmael persecuted Isaac. Legalists persecute those living in liberty.

4:30 Third, Christians should exclude legalists from their midst since legalists have no inheritance with the legitimate sons of God. As Abraham cast Ishmael out of his household, so the Galatians should cast the Judaizers out of the church. This does not mean church leaders should excommunicate all legalistic Christians. However, it might be wise to exclude promoters of legalism and nomism if they do not change their teaching. Paul's point was that nomists will not inherit as much blessing from God as those who live by the Spirit.

4:31 Paul concluded his allegorical argument by reminding his readers of the very basic and drastic difference between himself and the Galatians, who were children of faith, and the legalists and nomists, who were children of the flesh.

Paul's defense of salvation by faith alone (chapters 3-4) points out in the strongest terms the incompatibility of faith and works as methods of obtaining justification and sanctification. The Judaizers were trying to get the Galatians to submit to the Mosaic institutions to merit something from God. This approach is antithetic to grace, which acknowledges that people cannot merit God's favor and simply trusts in God to deliver what He has promised.

In this passage Paul contrasted faith and works as methods of obtaining God's favor. Elsewhere he stressed the importance of good works and gave many commands, positive and negative, to guide Christian behavior (e.g., Eph. 2:8-10). In those passages works express the Christian's gratitude to God for His grace. They do not make us more acceptable to God or make God love us more than He would if we did not do them.

What Jesus and the apostles taught about our rewards does not contradict Paul's emphasis here. We should commit ourselves to Jesus as lord (Rom. 12:1-3) and exercise discipline in our lives. We should do these things so we can earn a reward and receive the maximum inheritance possible when we stand before the judgment seat of Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 9:27). However we should do so as an expression of our gratitude (cf. Col. 1:10). We do not need to do so to earn God's favor or love (Rom. 8:31-39).

James' emphasis in his epistle was on the importance of living by faith after God has accepted us (James 2:14-26). Paul's emphasis in Galatians was on what makes us acceptable to God.