Galatians 4

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

Moving from Slavery to Freedom

 

The contrast presented in the previous chapter between imprisonment under the law (3:23-25) and new relationships in Christ (3:26-29) is now clarified by an illustration drawn from a household where sons were treated as slaves until they received the full rights of sons at the age of maturity. First, the slave like condition of the sons while they were still minors is described and applied to the human condition (4:1-3). Second, the sending of God's Son to liberate slaves and make them sons is announced (4:4-5). Third, the full rights of sons are disclosed (4:6-7).When Sons Were the Same as Slaves (4:1-3)

 

Paul gives us a portrait of a young boy in a wealthy home. This boy is the legal heir and future master of the entire estate. But as long as he is a child, his life is just like that of a slave. He is subject to guardians and trustees. They supervise him, discipline him and control him. Their orders regulate and restrain his behavior. He is under their authority until the time set by his father, when he will be free from their control and enjoy his full rights as heir and master of the family estate.

It is clear that Paul constructed this illustration to dramatize what life was like under the supervision of the law. But since he has already used the images of a jailer (3:23) and a disciplinarian (3:24-25) to dramatize the supervisory function of the law, why does he add yet another illustration of life under the law? To appreciate the reason for Paul's use of this additional illustration, we need to understand that Jewish Christians must have been astonished that their history under the Mosaic law had been compared to being imprisoned by a jailer and controlled by a disciplinarian. Paul himself would not have accepted such a description of Jewish history before his conversion. After all, the Jews had been redeemed from slavery in the exodus. In fact, when God set the Jewish people free, he had called them his "son" (Ex 4:23). The giving of the law began with the announcement of freedom for God's people: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery" (Ex 20:2). If God had redeemed his people from slavery, how could their whole existence under the Mosaic law until Christ be depicted in terms of slavery? It would certainly be appropriate to view the Gentile condition in terms of slavery, but surely not the Jewish condition. Such thoughts would have been in the minds of Jewish Christians and had probably been expressed to the Gentile Christians as well. No doubt the Gentile Christians had been told that only those who united with the Jewish people under the law could truly participate in the freedom God gave to his offspring, the people of Israel.

In this illustration Paul clarifies the condition of the Jewish people under the law. This is a much more positive image of slavery than the images of a jailer and a disciplinarian. Even in the best of homes, sons who are loved by their father and destined to be heirs of his estate go through a period of supervision. It is entirely appropriate for immature heirs to be subject to the care of guardians. Obedience to their guardians is evidence of their love for their father. But it would be inappropriate for sons to be kept under the supervision of guardians once they had reached the age of maturity. It is not a mark of disloyalty for sons to eagerly anticipate the day set by their father when they will no longer be subject to guardians but will enjoy their full rights as sons. Once that day comes, their love for their father will not be expressed through subjection to guardians but by a free expression of love from the heart of mature sons.

This illustration makes the point that even the Jewish people, the rightful heirs of God's promises to Abraham, experienced a certain kind of slavery for a period of time. In verse 3 Paul applies his illustration to the real historical experience of God's people: So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world. This picture of slavery under basic principles of the world continues the series of images representing slavery under the law: "held prisoners by the law" (3:23), "under the supervision of the law" (3:25), subject to guardians and trustees (4:2). So in some sense Paul understood the basic principles of the world as equivalent to the Mosaic law. Although the Mosaic law was given by God, it was not God's last and ultimate revelation. It was necessary, but only elementary teaching: it was the ABCs of God's revelation. To be subjected to the discipline of learning the ABCs is good and proper for an elementary student, but to be kept forever at that level of education would be a tragic kind of slavery.

Now Paul has established his thesis that all of God's people, the Jews as well as the Gentiles, came to the inheritance of salvation in Christ out of a similar situation of slavery. As we will see in our study of verses 8-10, Paul views the Gentile Christians' attempt to observe the Mosaic law as a return to slavery under "weak and miserable principles." By their subjection to Mosaic law they are returning to their preconversion slave like condition. The slavery of Gentiles under "weak and miserable principles" (v. 9) before their conversion and the slavery of Jews under the Mosaic law (the basic principles of the world [v. 3]) before Christ were certainly not similar in all respects. The pagan Gentiles were not enslaved to the Mosaic law; Jews were not enslaved to pagan idolatry. But these two situations of slavery were the same in one respect: Jews and Gentiles were enslaved to something less than the immediate knowledge of God enjoyed by Christians (see vv. 6, 9).

So when Paul says in 4:3 that when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world, he is emphasizing how even Jews were caught in the universal condition of slavery. In this common condition of helplessness, all alike are completely dependent on the liberating grace of God. How Slaves Became Sons (4:4-5)

 

Slaves were set free to enjoy the full rights of sons only because God acted in history: when the time had fully come, God sent his Son. This reference to the time of God's action in history is directly related to the time set by his father (v. 2) in the previous illustration and concludes a whole string of references to God's time schedule: "until the Seed . . ." (3:19); "before this faith . . . up until faith" (3:23); "now that faith . . . we are no longer . . ." (3:25). When God sent his Son, the former period of universal slavery ended; a new era of freedom was inaugurated.

God's plan of salvation cannot be understood merely in static terms as a logical system of ideas: revelation, God, human nature, Christ, salvation, church. God's redemptive work must be understood in the framework of his actions in history. God gave an irrevocable promise to Abraham; 430 years later God gave the law through Moses; at a time God had set, he sent his Son. The relationship of these acts of God in history provides the framework for understanding the redemptive work of God. Of course this does not mean that we should abandon systematic theology; we can develop logical expositions of the meaning of salvation. But we should always remember that the narrative structure of God's work in history is the substructure of all truly biblical theology.

The confusion of the Galatian Christians was the result of their failure to understand the narrative structure of the redemptive work of God. In their attempt to inherit the blessing promised to Abraham by keeping the Mosaic law, they failed to understand that the Mosaic law had been given 430 years after the Abrahamic promise and could not change the terms of the promise or be a condition for inheriting the promised blessing (3:15-18). In their attempt to make progress in their spiritual life by observing the law after believing the gospel, they failed to understand that supervision under the law ended when faith in Christ came (3:23-25).

At the center of this narrative framework is the narrative of the gospel story itself: God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law (4:4-5). Here we have a simple confessional statement of the essence of the gospel story: the incarnation and birth of Christ, his perfect life of obedience under the law, and his redemptive death on the cross.

The phrase God sent his Son is taken by some interpreters as merely a reference to the prophetic mission of Jesus. As the prophets of old were sent by God, so Jesus was sent by God for a special redemptive mission. The background may be found in the parable Jesus told about the wicked tenants of the vineyard (Mk 12:1-12): the owner of the vineyard (God) first sent messengers (prophets), who were killed by the tenants (Jewish leaders); then he sent his own son (Jesus), who was also killed. But in light of Paul's other references to the preexistence of the Son (see 1 Cor 8:6; Phil 2:5-8; Col 1:15-17), we may also see here an affirmation of the deity of Jesus. Before the incarnation, the preexistent Son was commissioned by God to set slaves free and make them children of God.

The next phrase, born of a woman, points to the incarnation and full humanity of Jesus. The Son of God was sent to be one with us in our humanity. He was God's Son and he was Mary's son--the one and only God-man. He was also born under law. The phrase under law cannot mean legalism, keeping the law to earn salvation. Jesus certainly did not live his life under the misconception that he had to keep the law to earn his salvation. To be born under law means to be born a Jew under obligation to keep the requirements of the Mosaic law. From his circumcision eight days after his birth to his celebration of Passover with his disciples just before his death, every detail of Jesus' life was under the direction of the law. His perfect obedience to God the Father, as God's Son born of a woman, fulfilled all the requirements of the law. God's Son took our place as a human being to offer a perfect obedience to God on our behalf.

To be born under law also means to experience the curse of the law against all who fail to observe all that the law requires (see 3:10). Although Jesus did fulfill all the requirements of the law, he still experienced all the conditions of sinful humanity under the curse of the law. He was subject to temptations, suffering, loneliness, and finally, on the cross, God-forsakenness and death.

The twofold purpose of the Son's full participation in our humanity, his perfect fulfillment of the law and his experience of the curse of the law on our behalf is given in the next two phrases: to redeem those under the law, that we might receive the full rights of sons (v. 5). Christ is uniquely qualified to fulfill these two purposes. Because he is the Son of God, he is able to give the position and rights of his sonship to sinful people. Because he became fully human, he is able to represent and redeem all humankind. And because he rendered perfect obedience to God and bore the curse of God against the disobedient, he is able to redeem those under the law. If being under law means being under obligation to keep the law and under the curse of the law for not keeping it, then to redeem those under the law means to set them free from both the obligation to keep the law and the curse of lawbreaking. When Paul says that Jesus was born under law, to redeem those under law, he means, as Calvin puts it, that "by putting the chains on himself, he takes them off the other." By taking the obligation and curse of the law upon himself, he set us free from both the obligation and the curse of the law.

The two verbs in verse 5, redeem and receive, present both sides of our relationship with God: God has already acted in history to set us free; for our lives to be changed by his action we need to respond in faith. Our response to God's action is depicted here as receiving the full rights of sons. This phrase in the NIV is a good translation of a legal term that means "adoption as sons." Adoption was defined by Roman law and widely practiced in Roman life. Several Roman emperors adopted men not related to them by blood in order to give them their office and authority. When a son was adopted, he was in all legal respects equal with those born into his new family. He had the same name, the same inheritance, the same position and the same rights as the natural-born sons. God sent his Son, who by his divine nature was the Son of God, in order that we, who are not his children by nature, might be his children by adoption and thus receive the full rights of sons. We have the same name, the same inheritance, the same position and the same rights as the one who is Son of God by virtue of his divine nature.

There is a shift in Paul's images here from the picture of a son who is treated like a slave until he reaches a certain age (vv. 1-2) to the picture of a slave who becomes a son by adoption (v. 5). The first picture clarifies the contrast between the two stages of redemption in history. The sending of the Son concluded the stage of slavery under law and inaugurated the new era when sons receive their inheritance. The second picture focuses on the nature of sonship itself. We are adopted as God's children by the sending of the Son of God. Enjoying the Full Rights of Sons (4:6-7)

 

Now Paul describes the way that children experience their full rights: Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts (v. 6). The change from first person (we) to second person (you) shows that the adoption received by those under law (v. 5) was also received by the Gentile converts. The confession of faith of Jewish Christians is now the confession of Gentile Christians. Though Gentiles were not under law in the same way the Jewish people were, Paul's point is that they too were set free from the tyranny and curse of the law by the sending of God's Son. And by faith in Christ, they too have entered into a new relationship with God which involves the enjoyment of the full rights of sons and daughters of God. Now their life is to be lived not "under law" but "in Christ."

The striking parallelism between God sent his Son and God sent the Spirit of his Son rivets our attention on God's gracious initiative. Just as our position as sons and daughters was secured by God's action in sending his Son, so our experience as sons and daughters is the result of God's action in sending the Spirit of his Son. We could do nothing to attain to the position of sons and daughters; we can only receive the gift of adoption by faith. We could do nothing to produce an experience as sons and daughters; the action of God in sending the Spirit of his Son into our hearts enables us to enjoy our new relationship with God our Father.

Paul makes it very clear that there is only one condition for the experience of the Spirit in our hearts: Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts. There is no other prerequisite for this experience of the Spirit besides receiving the gift of adoption. We do not need to go through a series of steps, recite special prayers or meet extra conditions. God sends the Spirit of his Son into our heart for one reason: because he adopted us into his family. To view adoption and reception of the Spirit as two separate stages in the Christian life tears apart the reciprocal relation of adoption and the sending of the Spirit. Paul's unique title for the Spirit here, Spirit of his Son, emphasizes the unity of the experience of adoption and the experience of the Spirit.

Just as verse 5 teaches us that the gift of adoption is ours when we receive it, so verse 6 teaches us that the sending of the Spirit into our hearts is experienced when we pray: the Spirit sent into our hearts is the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." Abba is an Aramaic word for "father" used by a child in intimate conversation within the home. When children addressed their father as Abba, they were expressing affection, confidence and loyalty. One of the most remarkable aspects of the life of Jesus was that he addressed God as Abba in his prayers and taught his disciples to do the same. So striking and significant was Jesus' addressing God as Abba that even in Greek-speaking churches Jesus' Aramaic word for Father was heard as the believers called out to God in prayer. They called God Abba because the Spirit of Jesus was assuring them within their hearts, the control center of their emotions and thoughts, that they were children of the Father.

To know at the deepest level of our being that God is our Father and we are his sons and daughters is not the result of theological research or moral achievement, but the result of God's sending the Spirit of his Son to speak to us and to convince us that despite all our guilt, fears and doubts, the Father of Jesus is our Father too. To know God as our Father in this way is not merely intellectual apprehension of a doctrine, not merely warm feelings about God, but a life-transforming conscious awareness of the reality of our intimate relationship with God our Father.

Paul is certainly not talking here about addressing God as Father in a formal liturgy in which there is no real involvement of the heart and will and mind. Nor is he talking about addressing God with an easy familiarity, as in prayers where God is addressed as "Daddy" in a chummy, casual way with no sense of awe or reverence. We must remember that when Jesus addressed his Father as Abba in the garden of Gethsemane, he was expressing both confident trust and willing obedience. " `Abba, Father,' he said, `everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will' " (Mk 14:36). So if the Spirit of the Son is moving us to call God Abba, then we will be expressing the same confident trust and willing obedience of the Son to the Father. All that Jesus did and said flowed out of his relationship with his Father. His sense of identity (who he was) was not based on his ministry (what he did), but just the reverse: he did what he did because he knew who he was. Likewise, the witness of the Spirit within us that God is our Father and we are his children is the center and fountainhead of all our Christian life and ministry.

People all around us are having identity crises. They are trying to find out who they are. They go for therapy to discover their inner selves; they search for their roots; they try to build their sense of self-worth on the foundation of their achievements. But far more important than any of these ways of finding out who we are, we need to experience the great gift of God the Father, the gift of his Spirit who tells us that we are children of God our Father. This experience of our identity before God is not necessarily a sensational or emotional experience. It is simply an experience of the Spirit's inner witness as we pray from our hearts to God.

We should always be amazed that when we pray we are included in the conversation of the Triune God. When we call God "Abba, Father," we are reminded by the very word Abba that Jesus used this name for God the Father in his prayers. We can address God as Father only because his Son gives us the right to do so. And we can exercise our right to call God Abba only by the activity of his Spirit within us who calls out, "Abba, Father." We call God Abba through the Son and in the power of the Spirit.

We will always find it difficult to explain the doctrine of the Trinity. But in prayer we experience the life and love of the Triune God. What an amazing privilege that we should be included in the conversation within the Trinity through prayer!

Verse 7 sums up Paul's argument to this point: So you are no longer a slave, but a son. The witness of the Spirit within convinces us that we are sons and daughters, children of God. Sons and daughters are no longer "held prisoners by the law" (3:23), "no longer under the supervision of the law" (3:25) and no longer subject to guardians and trustees (4:2). Sons and daughters are free from the control of the law. This does not mean that sons and daughters are free to do anything. They are now under the direction of the Spirit, who brings them into such close communion with God that they call him Abba. Sons and daughters who live in communion with the Father under the direction of the Spirit do not need the law to guide and discipline them. They are directed by a far superior power: the power of the Spirit.

To live under the direction of the law, as the Galatian believers were attempting to do, was sheer folly. "You foolish Galatians!" You are sons and daughters, not slaves. Why turn to the direction of the law when you have the direction of the Spirit? The tragedy of the Galatian situation was that believers who had entered into a love relationship with the Father by the activity of the Spirit in their lives were now acting like slaves, not like sons and daughters. They were relating to God on the basis of keeping his law rather than worshiping and serving him in the freedom and power of the Spirit of his Son. It is the same tragedy of the elder brother in Jesus' parable of the prodigal son. Although he served his father dutifully, he never called him "Father" or related to him as a son. He thought and acted like a slave: "All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders" (Lk 15:29).

I have greater appreciation for Paul's argument here now that my two sons are full-grown and no longer minors. I no longer attempt to restrict their behavior with the set of rules they had to follow when they were still young. In fact, if at this stage of their lives they responded to me simply on the basis of keeping my rules, I would be disappointed. What I long for now is for them to relate to me as mature sons. When they express love and respect to me simply because that is the desire of their heart, I am deeply grateful and filled with joy.

The consequence of being a son is inheritance: Since you are a son, God has made you also an heir (v. 7). The Galatian believers had been told that they must be related to the descendants of Abraham through observance of the law in order to inherit the promises God made to Abraham. But Paul has now demonstrated how faith in Christ makes one a child of God and so an heir of God. None of us can make ourselves children or heirs of God. Only God can make slaves into sons and daughters, and sons and daughters into heirs.

The promise of inheritance is the promise of the Spirit. Paul said in 3:14 that the blessing of Abraham came upon the Gentiles: they received the promised Spirit. What greater inheritance could there be than the presence of the Spirit of God, the Spirit of his Son, within our hearts? The Spirit of his Son not only assures us that we are beloved children of the Father; he also makes us like his Son. We are most like the Son of God when we totally identify with him in Gethsemane and are able by his Spirit to pray "Abba, Father." When Christ prayed "Abba, Father" in Gethsemane, he was expressing complete trust in his Father and his willingness to endure the cross in obedience to his Father. He was looking ahead with confident, obedient trust to both the cross and the resurrection. When we are sure of our adoption by the witness of the Spirit within, we will also be living in the power of the inheritance of the Spirit, who is in the process of making us like Christ in his death and resurrection. Every day something of his cross will be seen in us as we die to self. Every day something of his resurrection life will be seen as he lives through us. One day, after a final death and a final resurrection, we will be completely like him. That is our inheritance as the children of God.

I once heard a son speak at his father's funeral service about his inheritance. He said, "The greatest inheritance my father left me was not what he had but what he was. He was a man of integrity; he was humble and often admitted his own failures. He was generous and compassionate. Above all, he was a man of deep faith in God. That's the inheritance that I most treasure, the inheritance of the character of my father." As children of God, we can say the same. Our greatest inheritance is not the abundance of things the Father gives us, but the character of his Son which the Spirit of his Son is forming within us.

Galatians 4

   

Paul's Concern for the Galatians

⁸Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. ⁹But 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? ¹⁰You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! ¹¹I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Returning to Slavery Again?

 

Paul began his rebuke for foolishness with a series of searching questions that called the Galatian believers to reexamine their experience of God's miraculous work by his Spirit in their lives (3:1-5). He ends this section of his rebuke for foolishness in the same way. He has just reminded them that in their experience of the Spirit they have begun to communicate with God as their Abba, Father (v. 6). Now he asks his readers questions that point to the contrast between their present knowledge of God as his children and their former ignorance of God as slaves. The essence of the father-child relationship that they now enjoy is reciprocal knowledge: the Father knows his child; the child knows the Father. But in their attempt to observe the law they are actually turning from their intimate knowledge of God as his children and returning to the slavery they experienced in their former pagan way of life when they did not know God.

To help them see the foolishness of their ways, Paul first reminds them of their former condition of ignorance when they were enslaved by pagan idolatry (v. 8). Second, he draws their attention again to the knowledge of God which they now enjoy in their new relationship with God (v. 9). Third, he asks them why they are returning to slavery by observing the law (vv. 9-10). Finally, he expresses his deep concern for them (v. 11).When You Did Not Know God (4:8)

 

Immediately after expressing the amazing truth that Galatian believers are no longer slaves but children of God (vv. 6-7), Paul contrasts what they are now by God's grace with what they were before they believed the gospel: Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods (v. 8). Those who by nature are not gods were the objects that pagan Gentiles worshiped as gods. They might have been stone or wooden idols made by craftsmen. Or they have been the mythical beings, such as Zeus or Aphrodite, that the idols represented. Or they might have been demonic spirits that enslaved those who worshiped these idols and mythical beings. But whether the gods of the Gentiles were carved idols, mythical figures or demons, Paul rejects their divine status. They do not have the essential attributes of God; they are finite, created things, not the infinite Creator. In Romans 1 Paul expands his teaching on pagan worship: "They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator" (Rom 1:25).

People today, no less than the pagan Galatians in Paul's day, continue to worship and serve created things rather than the Creator. As a result of placing other things in the place of God, people, whether ancient or modern, do not know God. When Paul says you did not know God, he is not talking about theoretical knowledge. As we can see in the next verse, he is talking about the experiential knowledge of personal relationship. Human religious and philosophical efforts to know God are not able to lead us to an experiential knowledge of God. As Paul said to the Corinthian Christians, "In the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him" (1 Cor 1:21).Now That You Know God (4:9)

 

According to Paul, the result of conversion from paganism to Christ is the knowledge of God. But again we are quickly informed that what Paul means by knowledge is a personal encounter initiated by God: now that you know God--or rather are known by God (v. 9). Our knowledge of God is the result of his knowledge of us. Throughout the Bible, the joy of God's people is that God knows them. "O Lord, you have searched me and you know me," the psalmist sings (Ps 139:1). Jeremiah begins his prophecy with the certain knowledge that God knows him: "The word of the Lord came to me, saying, `Before I formed you in the womb I knew you' " (Jer 1:4-5). By contrast, the worst fate of all is to be unknown by the Lord. There are no more terrible words than the words "I never knew you. Away from me!" (Mt 7:23).

To be known by God is to be chosen and loved by him. Because he chose to know us as his own people, we know him as our God. This is the knowledge of personal relationship, a relationship initiated and sustained by God's grace.

This kind of knowledge was vividly illustrated for me one night as I was traveling by train from London to Cambridge. The man next to me pointed at the name of the author on the book I was reading and said, "He's a good bloke."

"Really?" I said. "Do you know him?" I was surprised, because the author of the book was John Polkinghorne, former Cambridge professor of mathematical physics and now the president of Queens College of Cambridge University, a world-renowned scientist and theologian; and the chap next to me on the train did not look or sound like either a colleague or a student of this great scholar.

"Oh yes, he knows me!" he asserted proudly. "I serve his table at the college." He was obviously delighted not only that he knew this famous author but also that he was known by him.

Although I have read several of Polkinghorne's books and read articles about him, I could not claim to enjoy the relationship that this chap had with him, even though he confessed that he had never read a word by him or about him.

The Galatian believers could also delight in knowing God and being known by him, even though they had not read his book. This was the knowledge of a love relationship. As Paul said to the Corinthians, "The man who loves God is known by God" (1 Cor 8:3).Why Are You Returning to Slavery? (4:9-10)

 

It must have come as a shock to the Galatian Christians to read these words. After all, they had no intention of returning to their former way of life in paganism. On the contrary, they were attempting to make progress in their new spiritual life by learning and observing the Mosaic law, which prohibited pagan idolatry. Yet now Paul is asking them why they are turning back to those weak and miserable principles. Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? he asks.

Paul's words all over again raise the alarming possibility that turning to the observance of the Mosaic law after conversion to Christ is actually comparable to taking up a pre-Christian position of pagan worship. Furthermore, Paul's use of the phrase those weak and miserable principles to describe both the Galatian believers' observance of law after their conversion and their pagan religious experience is parallel to his use of "the basic principles of the world" to describe the pre-Christian condition of the Jewish people under the law of Moses (v. 3). The only way to understand Paul's equation of observing the law and pagan worship is to recognize that whenever the observance of law takes the place of Christ as the basis of relating to God, it is as reprehensible as pagan worship.

Pagan religions are weak and miserable principles. They are weak because they do not have the power to overcome the guilt and power of sin; they are miserable, poor and impotent because they cannot impart a new life. In the same way the Mosaic codes are weak and miserable principles. The Mosaic law "declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin" (3:22), but it is powerless to set anyone free from the chains of sin. And the Mosaic law is not able to impart life (3:21). Therefore to substitute observance of the Mosaic law for complete reliance on Christ is just the same as returning to pagan worship.

An illustration of the weak and miserable principles to which the churches in Galatia were turning is given by Paul in verse 10: You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! Evidently the Jewish calendar had been instituted in the Galatian churches. They were planning to observe the regulations for weekly Sabbath days, monthly new moon festivals, annual festivals like Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles, and the sabbatical years. They must have been led to believe that their observance of these holy days and festivals would draw them closer to God. What foolishness! How could people who have already received adoption as children of God and are praying "Abba, Father" in the Spirit, people who know God and are known by him, start to depend on the observance of holy days for their relationship with God? Isn't this obviously a return to those weak and miserable principles that characterized their lives in paganism?

My Chinese colleagues at Trinity Theological College in Singapore have recently been expressing their concern that some Chinese churches are sounding more Confucian than Christian. Their point is that Chinese Christians are in danger of turning their faith into a version of Confucianism, which was what they followed before their conversion to Christ. In their Confucian background they maintained high moral standards. But they were not able to enter into a personal relationship with God by their moral achievements. In fact, they experienced unresolved guilt for not being able to live up to their own standards. When they first met Christ, they focused on their newfound personal relationship with God the Father, which they enjoyed through faith in Christ by the presence of his Spirit in their lives. But slowly their center of attention changed. They put more and more emphasis on the high moral standards of their Christian faith. They began to lose sight of what God had done for them in Christ and began to concentrate on what they must do to inherit "the good life." They were especially drawn to the Old Testament's legal codes. Then they formulated those moral laws in the familiar terms of their own Chinese cultural background. So my colleagues shake their heads with concern when they say of some fellow believers, "I'm afraid they sound more Confucian than Christian." Paul's Expression of Concern (4:11)

 

Paul treats the change of direction in the Galatian churches as an extremely serious matter. He is deeply troubled and upset. He even wonders if all his efforts in planting these churches will prove to be in vain.

Are we as grieved as Paul was when our churches begin to put the observance of law at the center of their life and worship? Are we so troubled when Christians put more emphasis on keeping certain traditions rather than on growing in their relationship with the Father through Christ in the power of the Spirit? Does our lack of concern for Christians who have become law-centered rather than Christ-centered indicate that we do not even recognize that a change has taken place or understand how destructive such a shift of focus can be?

With his expression of heartfelt concern for his converts, Paul closes the entire rebuke section of his letter. His rebuke for disloyalty to the gospel (1:6-10) was followed by his autobiographical account of his own loyalty to the gospel (1:11--2:21). His rebuke for foolishness regarding the gospel (3:1) was followed by his explanation of the Galatians' conversion experience and an exposition of Scripture (3:2--4:11) in order to show the relation of the gospel to the law. He will now move to his request for a change of direction.

Galatians 4

   

¹²I plead with you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. ¹³As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. ¹⁴Even 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. ¹⁵What 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. ¹⁶Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

   ¹⁷Those 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. ¹⁸It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. ¹⁹My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, ²⁰how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!

Personal Appeal

 

In order to understand Paul's personal appeal--become like me--we need to see how the entire rebuke section of the letter (1:6--4:11) establishes the background for this appeal. Paul rebuked the Galatian believers for disloyalty to the gospel (1:6). Under the influence of false teachers, they were turning from the true gospel and following another gospel which required circumcision and observance of the law for inclusion in the people of God. Paul reinforced his rebuke for disloyalty to the true gospel by telling the story of his own loyalty to the truth of the gospel (1:11--2:21). Since he was called by God to preach the gospel to Gentiles, he firmly resisted anyone who excluded Gentiles on the basis of the law. Paul also rebuked the Galatian Christians for foolishness about the gospel (3:1-5). In their confusion they thought that works of the law were required to enjoy the blessing of God. Paul undergirded his rebuke for foolishness by an exposition of the promise to Abraham fulfilled in Christ (3:6--4:11). Since Gentile Christians were children of Abraham and included in God's promise to Abraham because they believed in Christ, they could not be excluded from the blessing of God on the basis of the law.

This extended rebuke sets the stage for his initial request: Become like me. Of course this is a plea for reunion with Paul, for identification with him. But in light of all that Paul has said already in his letter, it is clear that he is asking for more than empathy; he is saying more than "Put yourselves in my place" (NEB). He is calling for the Galatians to imitate him in his loyalty to the truth of the gospel (see 2:5, 14). He is challenging them to die to the law so that they might live for God (see 2:19-20). He is pleading with them to be as free as he is from the tyranny of the law, and to enjoy with him all the benefits of the gospel (the Spirit, righteousness, blessing, adoption and inheritance of the promise) which are already available by faith in Christ (see 3:6--4:7). He is demanding that they resist the false teachers who are trying to bring them under the tyranny of the law.

The challenge--become like me--is needed precisely because they are not like Paul. They are giving into the persuasive teaching of the law teachers. Because they have been preoccupied with getting circumcised in order to belong to God's people and using Jewish law to guide their lives, they are drifting from their single-minded devotion to Christ. What they need is a renewal of their experience of union with Christ. The first step toward that renewal is the imitation of Paul.

To us it may seem presumptuous and risky for Paul to challenge people to imitate him in order to draw them back to Christ. Most of us would rather say, "Don't follow me, follow Christ!" We are too aware of our own inconsistencies and failures to set ourselves up as models for the Christian life. But this was Paul's way. He said to the Corinthians, "Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ" (1 Cor 11:1). Paul was well aware that the imitation of Christ needs to be illustrated in the experience of our peers. Without mentors who show us what it means to follow Christ in the rough-and-tumble of our contemporary world, imitation of Christ often seems an otherworldly, unattainable ideal. But when someone like ourselves gives us a living model to follow, we have a tangible, realizable pattern to guide us.

After his command, Paul gives four reasons to follow his example. Paul's Identification with the Gentile Galatians (4:12)

 

The first reason Paul gives to his readers for following his example is his identification with them: for I became like you (v. 12). In his evangelism of the Galatians, Paul did not preach at them from a distance. He entered into their culture, adapted to their ways and became one with them. Even though he was a Jew, trained as a Pharisee to be totally separate from Gentiles, he lived like a Gentile in order to reach the Gentiles for Christ. His practice of identification illustrated the principle he enunciated in 1 Corinthians 9:19-22: "I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. . . . To those not having the law I became like one not having the law . . . so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some."

The same practice of identification is necessary today, if we are going to communicate the gospel effectively to people. We must put ourselves in their place, eat what they eat, dress as they dress, talk their language, experience their joys and sorrows, and enter into their way of thinking. If we want people to become like us in our commitment to Christ, then we must become one with them.

One of the best examples of identification I've ever seen is a woman who lives in a country closed to all missionary activity. She lives with a large family. Except for participating in their religious practices, she has totally identified with the way this family lives. The government is sponsoring her to write the ancient legends of the people in a simple format for children to learn. As she has researched and written these stories, she has been able to enter into the mind of the people. They love the way she retells their favorite stories. In a quiet and very effective way she has been able to lead people to commit their lives to Christ because she first became one with them.

Paul's identification with the Galatians served as a compelling reason for them to stand with him in his commitment to Christ and freedom from the law. After all, if Paul as a Jewish Christian was willing and able to live like them, then it was clear that living like a Jew or a Gentile is not what matters. What matters is simply faith in Christ. The Galatians' Identification with Paul (4:12-16)

 

After reminding the Galatians of his identification with them, Paul recalls how they identified with him during his first visit. Their early enthusiastic response to him was a good reason for them to return to their "first love."

In the last phrase of 4:12, Paul reassures his readers: You have done me no wrong. Since he moves right on to remind them how well they treated him when he was with them the first time, Paul is probably telling them that he is still thankful for their kindness toward him, despite whatever may have happened during the recent crisis. Sometimes when a friendship is strained in a time of crisis, it is helpful to stir up memories of the initial warmth of the relationship. That is what Paul does here. And his description of the way he was received by the Galatians sets forth an admirable pattern for the way all true ministers of God ought to be received.

Paul recalls that it was because of an illness that he first preached the gospel to the Galatians (4:13). We often wonder what kind of illness Paul had. The suggestion that he had some kind of eye problem is supported by his statement in verse 15 that the Galatians were so concerned for him that they would have given him their own eyes if they could have done so. And Paul's use of "large letters" when he wrote (see 6:11) is also taken as evidence that he had eye trouble. Since I had eye surgery as a child and still struggle with poor eyesight, I've been encouraged by the thought that the great apostle was able to do so much even though he may have had eye trouble. But I must admit that there is insufficient evidence to be dogmatic about this theory. Paul's statement that the Galatians would have been willing even to give him their eyes is probably an idiomatic way of complimenting them for their compassion and generosity. And his use of large letters when he wrote was his way of emphasizing his point.

Of course there have been many other attempts to determine what illness Paul had. Some say he had malaria; others suggest epilepsy. If Paul had all the illnesses that our commentaries say he had, he was a very sick man indeed. The truth is, we have insufficient evidence to make an accurate diagnosis. But we should not let all the speculation about the nature of his illness distract us from Paul's perspective that even his illness was an opportunity to preach the gospel. It is common to view illness as a hindrance to preaching the gospel or an excuse not to do our duty. But Paul realized, as he says in a letter to the Corinthian church, that God's grace is sufficient for us in our weakness--in fact, that God's power is best expressed through our weakness.

Verse 14 indicates that Paul's illness was repulsive. It would have been understandable if the Galatians had turned away from him in disgust. But even though his illness was a trial for them to bear, they did not treat him with contempt or scorn. Instead, Paul exclaims with gratitude, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself (v. 14). Of course Paul does not mean that the Galatians actually regarded him as an angel of God or as Christ Jesus himself. The repeated as if introduces two exaggerated comparisons that compare how the Galatians initially welcomed Paul to the welcome they would have given an angel of God or Jesus Christ himself. And yet Paul was like an angel of God, since he was an apostle sent from God (1:1), so the Galatians were right to give him a welcome due to an angel of God. And Paul was so identified with Christ (2:20) that those who welcomed him also welcomed Christ himself.

In the Galatians' reception of Paul we see a wonderful example of the way to receive a messenger from God. In our day people want to listen to someone who has a good "TV image." If preachers' outward appearance is appealing, they get a big audience. But if they were ugly and sickly, as tradition tells us Paul was, then most people would switch channels to find a more attractive image. But the Galatians' reception of Paul was not based on outward appearances. If they had responded to Paul simply on the basis of his physical attractiveness, they would have rejected him with contempt. Instead they evaluated the messenger on the basis of his message and then welcomed him with open arms. For his message was the redemptive love of God expressed in Christ Jesus.

Verses 15 and 16 present a contrast: the Galatians had given Paul a royal welcome, but suddenly their attitude toward him changed drastically. What has happened to all your joy? he asks. The question looks back longingly to those joyful days when Paul first preached the gospel in Galatia. Paul reminds them that they would have gone to any extreme to help him during those days; they would have torn out their eyes for him if they could have done so. Since the eyes were considered the most precious parts of the body, this is a graphic, idiomatic description of the Galatians' devotion to Paul at the beginning of their relationship. But now their relationship has turned sour. The cause for the Galatians' change of attitude is given by Paul in verse 16. Although the NIV puts this verse in the form of a question, it should be taken as a statement of Paul's description of the Galatians' fickle change of heart: "So now I have become your enemy by telling you the truth!" No doubt the truth Paul refers to here is the truth contained in this letter: his rebuke for desertion from the true gospel (1:6) and foolishness about the gospel (3:1).

The dramatic shift from the Galatians' warm welcome to their cold rejection of Paul serves as a sober warning to both pastors and their churches. Pastors should not be so naive as to think they will always receive a warm welcome if they consistently teach the truth. In fact, teaching the truth will always run the risk of alienating some people. And people in the church need to be aware that their initial positive response to pastors who teach the truth will be severely tested when the truth cuts like a two-edged sword. During such a time of conviction, people need to maintain their loyalty to their pastors precisely because they have the courage to preach the truth even when it hurts. The Rival Teachers' Ulterior Motive (4:17-18)

 

The negative example of the rival teachers provides another reason for following Paul's example. They were exclusive and divisive in their relationships. They had launched an aggressive campaign to win the allegiance of the Galatian Christians--but, Paul declares, for no good. They were jealous leaders who envied the Galatian Christians' affectionate relationship with Paul. So they sought to alienate the Galatian believers from Paul. Literally, the verb alienate means "shut out" or "exclude." Although Paul does not actually say from whom this exclusion was desired, his focus here on his relationship with his readers indicates clearly that the rival teachers intended to alienate the Galatian Christians from Paul.

All too often leaders in the church seem to be more interested in the exclusive personal attachment of their followers to themselves than in the spiritual growth and unity of the entire body of Christ. Of course, as Paul admits in verse 18, it is not wrong to be zealous to win the affection of others, as long as it is for their welfare. But by the very way Paul states this general principle, he calls us to be careful lest we court the affections of others for our own selfish advantage or are courted in such a way ourselves. Paul's Ultimate Concern (4:19-20)

 

In contrast to the selfish motive of the rival teachers, Paul expresses his own deep, heartfelt concern for his dear children. He portrays himself as a pregnant mother, again in the pains of childbirth. This rather shocking maternal image captures the extent of Paul's identification with these Christians. In his love for them, he has had to go through labor pains for them twice: when he preached the gospel to them the first time, and now again as he seeks to bring them back to the true gospel. This is more than any mother must go through for her child. But Paul tells his children in the faith that he is willing to endure labor pains for them not just twice but until Christ is formed in you.

Actually, there is a sudden shift of images here. Paul views himself as a pregnant mother delivering her children, but now he views the Galatians themselves as pregnant people bearing Christ as an unformed fetus in their wombs. Paul is enduring the pains of childbirth for them until Christ is fully formed within them. From a scientific point of view this may seem like a very strange conjunction of images, but Paul's point is clear: because he loves his converts with a sacrificial love, he will endure any pain until the full image of Christ is seen in them.

The contrast between Paul and the rival teachers is striking. Their selfish motive is to attach the Galatians to themselves so that they will be the center of attention; Paul labors to attach them to Christ so that the full moral character of Christ will be expressed in them. Paul's personal appeal, become like me, must be interpreted in the light of this contrast. It is not simply a demand for personal attachment to Paul. It expresses his longing for the Galatians to be able to declare wholeheartedly with him, "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me!"

It is not surprising that the image of Paul's maternal love for his children is followed by an expression of his wish to be with them and change his tone (v. 20). If he were with them, he would want to change from his tone of rebuke for their past foolishness and give them parental counsel for their future conduct. In fact, he does that in his letter, which is a substitute for his personal visit. Up to this point in his letter, his dominant tone has been one of rebuke. But now that he has called for a renewal of their friendship in this paragraph (vv. 12-20), he turns his attention to instructions. Yet still he has a heavy heart, for he is perplexed about them (v. 20). What will their foolishness lead them to do? What will be the outcome of their confusion? Such questions move Paul to give clear directions in the rest of his letter, to guide his readers out of their slavery to false teaching into the freedom of the true gospel of Christ.

We cannot help but be moved by Paul's passion for his people. He feels their pain; he identifies with their struggle. He has the heart of a good mother caring for her newborn. May God raise up evangelists and pastors like him in our generation.

Galatians 4

   

Hagar and Sarah

²¹Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? ²²For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. ²³His 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.

   ²⁴These 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. ²⁵Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. ²⁶But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. ²⁷For 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.”

   ²⁸Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. ²⁹At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. ³⁰But 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.” ³¹Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

Scriptural Appeal

 

After his personal appeal ("become like me"), Paul begins to give specific direction to the Galatians. He does this first of all by taking their own perspective: since they want to be under the law, Paul asks if they are aware of what the law says to them (v. 21). His opening question is a clue that although the Galatians have expressed their desire to keep the regulations of the Mosaic law, they have not yet fully understood or accepted all the obligations of the law. We know from verse 10 that they are already trying to observe the Jewish calendar. And we will see in 5:2 that some of them have gotten circumcised. But Paul has to inform them in 5:3 that once someone is circumcised, he is under obligation to keep the whole law. At this point in his letter Paul takes their position and says, as it were, "Well, now if you really want to keep the law, let me tell you how the law applies to your situation."

Paul's application of the law to their situation is taken from the story of Abraham's two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. When we read through Paul's use of Scripture in this section, we encounter a strange allegorical interpretation. In all of the New Testament, there is perhaps not a more difficult passage to interpret. This passage has often been used to accuse Paul of twisting and distorting Scripture. Betz says that this passage "has strained the credulity of the readers beyond what many people can bear" (1979:244). Paul explicitly calls attention to his method of interpretation in verse 24: these things may be taken figuratively. A more accurate translation of this phrase than the NIV would be "these things are now being interpreted allegorically." Paul must have inserted this reference to his method of interpretation because he knew that his use of this method of interpreting the biblical text would cause difficulty for his readers. In order to appreciate what Paul is doing here, we need to get an overview of the passage, to look at the whole before looking at the parts. Let's consider Paul's purpose for his allegorical interpretation, the false teachers' interpretation and Paul's method of interpretation.

You can often tell the purpose of a book by simply reading its introduction and conclusion. Paul introduces his interpretation of the Old Testament text by pointing out the difference between the two sons of Abraham: one was born of the slave woman in the ordinary way, while the other was born by the free woman as the result of a promise (vv. 22-23). Paul concludes his interpretation with these words: Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman (v. 31). His introduction and conclusion make it clear that his primary purpose is to identify the Galatian Christians as the true children of Abraham, the children of the free woman, the children of promise. As we have seen already, the primary point of Paul's argument in chapter 3 was also to answer this question of the identity of the Galatian Christians: "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (3:29). So when we examine the details of Paul's allegorical interpretation, we need to keep in mind this central point to understand where Paul is headed.

When we consider the context for the allegory in the broader setting of the entire letter, we can also see that Paul constructed the allegory to call for decisive resistance to the false teachers. Paul began the body of his letter by rebuking the Galatians for giving in to the pressure of troublemakers who were leading them to accept a false gospel (1:6-7). In his autobiography Paul illustrated how he decisively resisted pressures from Jewish Christians at Jerusalem (2:3-5) and at Antioch (2:11-14) similar to those faced by the Galatian churches. The request section of the letter begins with the initial request of the letter in 4:12, "become like me," which calls for the Galatians to resist the false teachers just as Paul had resisted the false brothers. His own stand against those "Ishmaels" is now supported by the command of Scripture (Gen 21:10 in Gal 4:30), and Paul asks his converts to follow this command as well. To those who want to be under the law (v. 21) Paul gives a specific command to follow: Get rid of the slave woman and her son (v. 30). In 5:1 Paul paraphrases the call for decisive resistance expressed by the command of Genesis 21:10 in his own words: "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery."

So Paul's purpose for his allegorical interpretation of Genesis 21 is to identify the Galatian Christians as the children of freedom and to instruct them to resist those who would lead them into slavery under the law.

We might well wonder why Paul chose such a text to prove that Gentile Christians were the true descendants of Abraham. After all, on the surface it would seem that Paul had to use extreme measures to make the text serve his purpose. In fact, the text seems to fit the position of the false teachers better. We can easily imagine that Jewish Christians would have claimed that as Jews they were the sons of Isaac, the legitimate children of Abraham, while the Gentiles were like the Ishmaelites, illegitimate children. As the children of Isaac, the son of promise, the Jewish Christians could have gone on to claim that only those who attach themselves to the true people of God by circumcision and keeping the law can ever hope to inherit the promises of God. They would probably have threatened expulsion to all those who refused to live under the yoke of the law, as all full members of the Jewish Christian community were expected to live. They might have also claimed that the mother church in Jerusalem supported their teaching.

This line of speculation seems reasonable enough. But did the false teachers actually use the text in that way? Of course we cannot know for sure, but there seems to be good evidence that they did. First of all, the one undisputed fact in Paul's description of the rival teachers' campaign in the Galatian churches is their promotion of circumcision: they "are trying to compel you to be circumcised" (6:12). Since the law establishes circumcision as the sign of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen 17:10-14), and since circumcision and the Abrahamic covenant are closely linked in all strands of Jewish literature, it is difficult to imagine how the opponents could have promoted circumcision without referring to Abraham.

Second, the way Paul develops his allegory of Abraham's two sons immediately after his comment that the Galatians desire to be under the law (4:21) suggests that he was confronted by teachers who equated Abrahamic descent with being under the law. In fact, in the Jewish literature of Paul's day one of the most celebrated characteristics of Abraham was his perfect obedience to the Mosaic law.

Third, the way Paul introduces the Abraham story itself with the formula it is written (v. 22) is a clue that he is responding to the rival teachers' use of the same passage. Usually this formula introduces a quotation. But here it simply introduces a very brief summary of the Abraham story, which spreads over a number of chapters of Genesis: Abraham had two sons. It appears that the Gentile believers in Galatia have already been told the story.

Fourth, the women are introduced as the slave woman and the free woman. Which slave woman and which free woman? Paul seems to assume that his readers already know that the slave woman is Hagar, the free woman Sarah.

In light of this evidence for the false teachers' own use of the Abraham story, including the Hagar-Sarah story, we can safely conclude that Paul deemed his allegorical treatment of the Hagar-Sarah story necessary "because his opponents had used it and he could not escape it. His so called allegorical treatment of Abraham was evoked not by a personal love of fantastic exegesis but by a reasoned case which it was necessary that he should answer" (Barrett 1982:162). When we work through Paul's interpretation, it will be helpful to keep in mind that it is a rebuttal of a number of strong points in the rival teachers' argument.

If we hope to understand Paul's allegorical treatment of Scripture, we need to describe the method he used. Paul's statement that he was interpreting the Hagar-Sarah story allegorically does not automatically decide the question as to the exact nature of his exegetical method. Some of the early church fathers, such as John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia, insisted that by "allegorical" Paul actually meant "typological." Many later commentators have taken the same view. R. Hanson's definition of these terms helps to sharpen the distinction between allegory and typology: "Typology is the interpreting of an event belonging to the present or recent past as the fulfillment of a similar situation recorded or prophesied in Scripture. Allegory is the interpretation of an object or person or number of objects or persons as in reality meaning some object or person of a later time, with no attempt made to trace a `similar situation' between them" (1959:7). On the basis of this definition, we can see that Paul used both a typological method and an allegorical method in his interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah story.

Paul saw a real correspondence between the historical situation of the two sons of Abraham and the two sorts of descendants of Abraham in his own day--those born according to the flesh and those born according to the Spirit. This correspondence is emphasized by the grammatical construction of 4:29: At that time . . . It is the same now. Then, as now, the son according to the flesh persecuted the son according to the promise. Paul depicts the hostile activities of the troublemakers in Galatia in Galatians 1:7, 3:1, 4:17, 5:7-10 and 6:12-13. Since the Galatian believers were the persecuted and not the persecutors, they were obviously the children of the free woman through the promise. They were experiencing the fulfillment of a situation in the life of Isaac recorded in Genesis 21. On the basis of this real correspondence between the historical event in the life of Isaac (the type) and the fulfillment of that event in the present life of the Galatian churches (the antitype), Paul rephrases the words of Sarah in Genesis 21:10 as a divine command for the Galatian churches: 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" (4:30). Galatians 4:31 is the natural conclusion Paul draws from this interpretation: Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

Typological interpretation, such as this appears to be, is grounded on the conviction that God acts in similar ways in different periods of history and that the event of salvation in Christ is the fulfillment of history, law and prophecy. From this perspective, persons and events associated with the event of salvation in Christ will be seen to correspond to the original situation. Seen in this light, Paul's application of the Genesis account to the Galatian churches is based not on arbitrary, fanciful definitions but on actual parallels in history: At that time . . . It is the same now.

But when we turn to verses 24-27, we see Paul using an allegorical method of interpretation. For the correspondence between Hagar and Mount Sinai and the present Jerusalem is not a historical correspondence.

Among Jewish thinkers, Philo of Alexandria, a contemporary of Paul, was the most prominent practitioner of allegorical interpretation. Philo saw the Old Testament as primarily a book of symbols that have hidden meaning beyond the literal, historical sense. His allegorical interpretation of these symbols was guided not by the constraints of the text but by his desire to demonstrate that the Jewish Scriptures contained the essence of Greek philosophy. In his interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah story, Sarah represents virtue and true wisdom, whereas Hagar represents general education. So Philo uses the allegory to contrast the superior value of true wisdom, which is found in the sacred Scriptures, to general education, which prepares one for secular work. In that allegory Isaac is the true philosopher trained in holy Scriptures; Ishmael is the sophist, unable to perceive eternal ideals.

Paul, of course, is not using the text as Philo did, to expound Platonic philosophical principles. Nevertheless, he is giving a meaning to the various terms of the text in an allegorical fashion. The theological framework for Paul's allegorical interpretation comes from his Abraham argument in chapter 3. In that argument Gentile converts were identified as true children and heirs of Abraham on the basis of the promise given to Abraham and the fulfillment of that promise in their experience of the Spirit. The Abraham argument also set out a contrast between the Abrahamic covenant as the means of life and righteousness and the Sinaitic covenant as the means of slavery.

Thus when the Genesis account is interpreted allegorically, it is not surprising that Sarah and her counterpart--the Jerusalem above, our true mother--should be identified as the mother of the Galatian believers in Christ. It follows naturally enough that Sarah can also be equated with the covenant of promise--a promise that included Abrahamic blessings for Gentiles as the seed of Abraham.

All these equations are built on the exposition of the gospel in the light of Old Testament texts in Galatians 3. In other words, Paul's allegorical definitions in Galatians 4 do not determine or form the basis of his theology but are derived from his theology, which has already been developed in the previous chapter.

A natural consequence of Paul's definitions of these terms in the allegorical equation is that Hagar becomes a symbol of the covenant at Mount Sinai. At this point in his interpretation, however, the basis for Paul's definitions becomes more problematic. How can Paul make the "Hagar Mount Sinai" and "Sinai present Jerusalem" equations in the face of the fundamental Jewish conviction that the Mosaic law was given to the descendants of Isaac at Mount Sinai and had nothing to do with Hagar?

The most satisfactory explanation of Paul's allegorical equations is simply stated in verse 25: because she is in slavery with her children. In Paul's allegorization of the text, slavery is the common feature that links Hagar (the slave woman), the covenant given at Mount Sinai, and the present Jerusalem. Paul has already attributed this feature of slavery to the Mosaic law (3:22-24; 4:1-10) and to a certain faction of "false brothers" at Jerusalem (2:4). His allegorization therefore must be seen as a counterattack on that Jewish-Christian faction within the church at Jerusalem which had tried to rob Gentile believers of their freedom by requiring them to be circumcised (2:3-6) and which was now attempting to do the same thing at Galatia. This actual experience of "false brothers" in the church gave rise to Paul's allegorical treatment of the text and is the key to its interpretation.

Paul's basic typological interpretation is supplemented by an allegorical treatment in order to relate the people in the story to the specific issues in the Galatian church and so to counterattack the false teachers' use of the same text.

Now that we have taken time to get an overview of this complex passage, we can turn to verse-by-verse exposition.

After his introductory question (v. 21), Paul sets forth the historical contrast between the two sons of Abraham (vv. 22-23); he develops this contrast by means of allegorical comparisons (vv. 24-26) and then adds a scriptural confirmation (v. 27). In verses 28-30 Paul addresses his readers directly and spells out the personal consequences of his interpretation for their lives. Finally, Paul underscores the main point again in his conclusion (v. 31).Historical Contrast (4:22-23)

 

The contrast between Abraham's two sons is established in terms of their social status (v. 22) and the manner of their birth (v. 23). Ishmael's mother, Hagar, was Abraham's slave; Isaac's mother, Sarah, was Abraham's wife, a free woman. Since the social status of the mothers determined the social status of their sons, Ishmael was a slave and Isaac was free. Furthermore, there was nothing supernatural about Ishmael's birth: it happened in the ordinary way, as a natural result of the sexual union of Abraham and Hagar. NIV's in the ordinary way is a good paraphrase of "according to the flesh." In this context flesh is not used as a negative, judgmental term; it simply indicates that Ishmael's birth was not caused by anything except the normal biological processes of conception and birth. On the other hand, Isaac was born as the result of a promise. The only way that Abraham's sexual union with his aged, barren wife Sarah could have resulted in conception and birth was by the supernatural fulfillment of the promise of God.

So far Paul has simply summarized the biblical narrative of Abraham's two sons. But what a dramatic contrast his simple summary sets forth: slavery by natural birth and freedom by supernatural birth! It does not take much imagination to see how this contrast could be effectively used to illustrate and apply the truth already given in this letter. If you have only experienced natural birth, you are by nature a slave. But if you have experienced supernatural birth by the fulfillment of God's promise in your life, you are by God's grace set free. Before Paul develops these personal implications, however, he sets up a series of allegorical comparisons. Allegorical Comparisons (4:24-26)

 

Since contemporary Jewish exegesis of the Hagar-Sarah story would have supported the position of the false teachers in Galatia, it was necessary for Paul to redefine the terms of the story so that he could draw out its real meaning as he saw it. The purpose of his allegorical comparisons is to establish the identification of the false teachers with Hagar and Ishmael (vv. 24-25) and the identification of the Galatian believers with Sarah and Isaac (vv. 26-28).

The identification of the false teachers with Hagar and Ishmael is developed in four steps. The first step identifies Hagar with the covenant from Mount Sinai and the children of Hagar with the children of the Sinaitic covenant: the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar (v. 24). This comparison is based on the common understanding that the children of slave women are slaves. If Hagar represents the covenant from Mount Sinai, then the children of that covenant are destined to be slaves, since the children of Hagar, the slave woman, were destined to be slaves. Paul has already argued that those who adhere to the Sinaitic covenant are enslaved by it (3:19--4:10). His allegorical comparison here builds on that argument and leads to the identification of the rival teachers with Hagar's children, so that he can appeal to the Galatian believers in the words of Genesis 21:10 to resist the influence of those teachers.

The second step in this identification process undergirds the Hagar-Sinaitic covenant comparison. Such a comparison contradicts the common Jewish understanding that the Sinaitic covenant was given to the descendants of Isaac and was therefore not related to Hagar and her descendants. So now Paul sets forth a Hagar-Mount Sinai equation to support his Hagar-Sinaitic covenant equation: Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia (v. 25). Paul appears to be connecting Hagar with Mount Sinai on the basis of her name and the geographical location of Mount Sinai. In what way the name Hagar can be connected with Mount Sinai is extremely difficult to understand. There may have been some Jewish way of equating the numerical value of the words Hagar and Sinai or the sound of the Hebrew name Hagar may have been similar to the sound of a word associated with Mount Sinai. It is easier to understand how Hagar could be connected with Mount Sinai on a geographical basis, since Mount Sinai is in Arabia, the land inhabited by the Arabians, the descendants of Hagar and Ishmael.

The third step in Paul's identification of the children of Hagar as the false teachers in Galatia is his assertion that Mount Sinai corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem (v. 25). Paul's addition of Jerusalem to his allegorical equations makes sense only if the false teachers themselves were closely identified with the Jerusalem church. In other words, Paul mentions Jerusalem to increase the number of contact points between the false teachers who were associated with Jerusalem and the descendants of Hagar. Perhaps Paul's declaration in the next verse--but the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother--was his response to one of the slogans of the false teachers: "We come from the mother church in Jerusalem" (Lincoln 1981:17).

The fourth step supports the "Mount Sinai Jerusalem" equation by drawing attention to the common characteristic of slavery of both the children of the Sinaitic covenant and the children of Jerusalem: because she is in slavery with her children. Jerusalem was the proud capital city for all the recipients of the covenant given at Mount Sinai. And the center of life in Jerusalem was the study and teaching of that covenant. The goal of life in Jerusalem was to regulate all of life by the law given at Mount Sinai. Since the Sinaitic covenant enslaved all who relied upon it and tried to regulate their lives by it (see 3:19--4:11), it followed that Mount Sinai and Jerusalem could be equated on the basis of this common characteristic of slavery. Furthermore, since the false teachers were characterized by their emphasis on the demands of the Sinaitic covenant and their appeal to the authority of the Jerusalem church, it follows that they were themselves in slavery and could therefore be identified as the children of Hagar, the slave woman.

Paul's allegorical comparisons are not easy to follow. They have raised a host of unresolved problems for interpreters. But we need to remember that whatever rationale Paul used for his equations of Hagar with Mount Sinai and the present Jerusalem, the goal of these comparisons was the identification of the false teachers with Ishmael as the children of slavery because of their emphasis on the Sinaitic covenant. Once this identification was established, Paul could then appeal to the Galatians in the words of the law itself to get rid of the slave woman and her son.

The identification of the Galatian believers with the children of Sarah begins with a contrast between the present Jerusalem, whose children are in slavery, and the Jerusalem above, which is free. She is our mother, Paul declares (v. 26). This contrast mixes two pairs of opposites: present-future, below-above. In Jewish prophecy the Jerusalem above was the consummation of all of God's promises for his people. In the heavenly new Jerusalem the people of God would experience the perfect rule of God in peace and harmony with him, one another and all of the new creation. But Paul does not put the heavenly Jerusalem in the future. His use of present tense indicates that the Galatian believers are already citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem. Since they are already experiencing the Spirit of God, they are already enjoying the fulfillment of the promises of God. This means that they have already entered the heavenly Jerusalem. They can shout with joy, She is our mother!

This contrast is a dramatic way to show how foolish it would be to follow the demands of the false teachers. They were commending themselves as representatives of Jerusalem and teachers of the law of Moses. But there was no good reason for those who were experiencing the freedom of life as citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem to be bound by slavery to the law, which was characteristic of the present, earthly Jerusalem.

The Jewish pride in Jerusalem is an understandable human affection. We often take special pride in the city of our origin. I'm quite happy to identify myself as a "Chicago boy," since I was born in Chicago. Chicago is one of the great cities of the world, I think. But like Christian in John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, we look forward to the city of our destination, the heavenly Jerusalem. And even now, as Paul insists here, we can rejoice that we are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem by faith in Christ. One of the greatest reasons for taking delight in our citizenship in the heavenly Jerusalem is that people from every race, nation, language group and social class belong to that city. Whereas identification with the city of our origin sets us apart from people from other cities, identification with our city of destination unites us with people from every city. Scriptural Confirmation (4:27)

 

Paul confirms his identification of his converts as the children of the Jerusalem above with a quotation from Isaiah 54:1. This prophecy assures Israel during her barren time of the Babylonian captivity that she will one day have more children than ever before. The Jews took it as a prophecy not only of the restoration of Israel but also of the time when multitudes of Gentiles would turn to God and claim Israel as their mother by becoming full members of the Jewish nation. Paul sees the fulfillment of the prophecy in the birth and growth of the church. The multiplication of the children of Sarah and the heavenly Jerusalem was a tangible reality for Paul as he witnessed the faith of Gentiles and their reception of the Spirit. Moreover, they were not born in the ordinary way but as the result of a promise (v. 23)--this promise from Isaiah! As Paul saw this ancient promise of God fulfilled in his own mission to the Gentiles, he must have also fulfilled the commands of the prophecy: Be glad . . . break forth and cry aloud! What a wonderful surprise it was for him to see God fulfilling his word in this way as he preached the gospel to Gentiles. Personal Consequences (4:28-30)

 

After his use of Scripture to confirm what has actually happened in his mission, Paul draws out the personal consequences for the Galatian believers: Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise (v. 28). Just as Isaac was born as the result of a promise, so the Gentile believers were born as a result of the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham (3:8) and his promise through the prophet Isaiah (4:27). So the link between the Galatians and Isaac is established.

That link is confirmed by the Galatians' experience of persecution. The Jewish Christian teachers have been harassing them with their requirements and demands. That is exactly what happened in the story of Ishmael and Isaac: 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 (v. 29). Genesis says that Ishmael mocked Isaac (Gen 21:9). Interpreting this text in the light of his own experience, Paul saw Ishmael's treatment of Isaac as derisive and abusive.

One personal consequence of being like Isaac is being mocked and persecuted by "false brothers" like Ishmael. Paul experienced fierce opposition from "false brothers" who tried to destroy him and his work. As it was at that time . . . it is the same now (v. 29). His story has been repeated many times throughout the history of the church. Often the most painful opposition comes not from those who are totally unrelated to the church, but from those who have positions of power within the church but lack the true power of the Spirit. We can see this illustrated in the time of the Protestant Reformation, when the powers of the Church of Rome ruthlessly persecuted the Reformers.

Now Paul is ready to apply the law directly to the Galatian crisis: But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son" (v. 30). Paul has really turned everything upside down. To those who want to be under the law he gives a command that must be interpreted within his framework of definitions to mean that they should expel the law teachers: Obey the law by getting rid of the law teachers! Excommunicate them!

The command for expulsion also carries with it an exclusion from inheritance: For the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son (v. 30). This has sometimes been taken as an absolute exclusion of all Jews, or at least of all unbelieving Jews. But Paul has a more specific target in mind. He is concerned about the subversive influence of those who have been teaching another gospel (1:6-9), those who have been bewitching his converts with their demand for law observance (3:1), those who are zealous to win the Galatians to themselves and to alienate them from Paul (4:17). It is these people who are forfeiting their inheritance by depending on the law rather than on the promise fulfilled in Christ (3:18).

The clear implication of this exclusion of the law teachers from the inheritance is that those who depend on the promises of God fulfilled in Christ will receive the inheritance. They are the true children of Abraham and Sarah; they are the Isaacs.

The consequence of being an Isaac is not only persecution, it is also inheritance. The pain of rejection by "false brothers" is more than offset by the joy of acceptance as children and heirs of promises made and kept by God. Already all who have faith in Christ enjoy the inheritance: they have received their citizenship in the heavenly Jerusalem. The proof of that citizenship is the presence of the Spirit in their lives: they have been born by the power of the Spirit (v. 29).Conclusion (4:31)

 

The conclusion of the entire Hagar-Sarah allegory emphasizes once again the identification of believers in Christ: Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. The freedom-slavery and Spirit-flesh antitheses which Paul has constructed in his allegory serve as the framework for his ethical instructions in the rest of the letter. The children of the free woman, who were born by the power of the Spirit (v. 29) must learn to express their freedom by walking in the Spirit. They must not submit to slavery under the law or gratify the desires of the flesh.

Identity is the basis of behavior: a clear understanding of who we are in Christ guides our conduct in the Spirit.