Galatians 5 v 7 – 12 - Divine condemnation of those leading the Galatian Christians astray

 ‘You were running well. Who cut into you, not being persuaded of the truth, 8 the self-produced persuasion absolutely not from out of your summons and calling? 9 A little yeast is fermenting the whole lump. 10 I, on my part, am convinced towards you within the Lord that you will have no other mindset. But the one disturbing, troubling and agitating you will carry the judicial decision, whoever he is. 11 Now brothers if I still, even now, am proclaiming circumcision, why am I still pursued and persecuted, since the cause of stumbling, the cross, has been rendered entirely idle? 12 Oh that those turning you upside down will also ‘cut themselves off’, (Galatians 5 v 7 - 12).

Paul is very abrupt in style in verses 7 – 12. His thought jumps from subject to subject, not stopping to insert links of connection. He says that the Galatian Christians were ‘running well’ – elsewhere he likens the Christian life to athletes running a race in order to win the prize and he says that they were doing well, but then he asks, ‘Who, not being persuaded of the truth, cut in?’ Who, as it were, knocked them sideways so as to lead them to take another route? In turning back to the written codes of the Sinai Covenant, the Galatian Christians have persuaded themselves. What they are holding to is not from out of their calling by God. The belief that it is necessary to obey the laws of Moses and blend the observance of Jewish law with Christian teaching in order to be delivered and maintain a godly life, cannot be traced to God, even though those who are teaching it pretended to be commissioned by Him. Those who are wayward in the fellowship may be few, but they will soon ruin the whole assembly, because a small portion of legalism, if mixed with the Gospel, corrupts its purity and undermines the whole. Though they had been led astray and had embraced many false opinions, yet, on the whole, Paul had confidence in them and believed they would yet return and embrace the truth, as Paul had taught it. 

‘But the one disturbing, troubling and agitating you…’. Paul seems to have a particular individual in mind, perhaps the leader of the false teachers who was causing the most mischief among them. This agitator had unsettled the minds of the Galatian Christians and caused them to halt between two mutually exclusive Covenants, Moses and the Messiah, law and Gospel, and divine approval attained by working to observe the law or by means of the atoning sacrifice of the Messiah. Paul says that this individual ‘will carry the judicial decision, whoever he is’. Whoever endeavoured to lead them astray, whatever their status, God will reward them according to their behaviour. They will carry the consequences of God’s judicial decision. 

‘Now brothers…’. Another abrupt transition by Paul. It may well be that Paul had at one time seemed to preach, or at least permit, circumcision. This may have arisen from the fact that he had circumcised Timothy, (Acts 16 v 3) ‘on account of the Jews in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek’. This would have been so that the Jews did not immediately reject Timothy as he and Paul sought to announce the gospel to them. It was done to avoid the opposition and reproaches of the Jews. But Paul did not want any misunderstanding. He was not teaching that male Gentile Christians had to be circumcised. Paul had never complied with Jewish customs where there was danger that his behaviour would be understood. He did not want people to think that he regarded such customs and laws indispensable, or as furnishing a basis for divine approval. The fact that Jews are still persecuting me, he says, is full demonstration that I am not regarded as teaching the necessity to be circumcised. Circumcision is the special badge of Jewish religion; it implies all the rest, and if I preach the necessity of it, then this would satisfy the Jews and save me from persecution. But if I teach the necessity of circumcision, as alleged, then the cause of stumbling for Jews, the cross, is removed - ‘If you let yourselves be circumcised, the Messiah will be of no value to you at all’, (Galatians 5 v 2). It is because I preach the Messiah crucified, and not Mosaic law as the sole basis of divine approval that they persecute me.

Paul says, ‘I am so far from agreeing with them, so far from preaching the necessity to be circumcised, that I sincerely wish that they were excluded from the assembly, as being unworthy of having a place among the children of God’.

Galatians 5 v 1b – 6 - The Messiah frees Christians from the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of law

 ‘The anointed has set us free, therefore, stand firm, not holding yourselves within the yoke of slavery once more. 2 Look, I Paul am saying to you that if you become circumcised, the anointed will benefit you nothing 3 and I call to witness once more, that every man being circumcised is indebted to continue constructing the whole of the law. 4 Whosoever being judicially approved and right-wise within law, you are idle and inactive away from the anointed one, you have dropped away from the freely extended favour, 5 for we are eagerly awaiting judicial approval and being made right wise with confident expectation from out of Breathful [Pneuma] persuasion. 6 For within Jesus the anointed one, neither circumcision nor foreskin has any power, strength or ability, on the contrary, persuasion to the point of obedience, effectively working by means of practical beneficial love’, (Galatians 5 v 1b - 6).

What is the practical application and result of this allegory of Sarah and Hagar? It is that God’s anointed, Jesus, has set us Christians, both Jews and Gentiles, free. Jewish Christians in particular have been set free from being enslaved to the Sinai Covenant with its written codes of law. Therefore – stand firm within this freedom. Persevere within it. Maintain it. Hold on to it. Don’t turn back to the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of law so as to be enslaved again. 

Then in verse 2 Paul addresses a wider audience. He turns his attention to those male Gentile Christians who were being pressured by these visiting Jews to be circumcised according to Covenant law. Paul says, ‘Look, it’s me, Paul, an Apostle, who is speaking to you’. He sets out his own delegated authority in opposition to these Judaizers. 

First of all he says to these Gentile Christians, ‘If you submit to circumcision then the Messiah will benefit you nothing at all. You are entering into a completely different Covenant or set arrangement that negates or bypasses the Messiah’. 

Second, he reminds them of what he has told them before. ‘Every man being circumcised is indebted to begin and continue constructing the whole of the law’. Failure to observe just one aspect of divine law results in self-forfeiture and loss. When it comes to combating legalism it is important that the law is correctly perceived as an integrated unified whole containing both moral and ceremonial aspects. 

Third, whoever is seeking ongoing and final divine judicial approval within the sphere of Covenant law is ‘idle and inactive away from the anointed one’. These two set arrangements cannot be mixed or blended together. Within the Messiah, an individual is rendered idle and inactive away from the external written codes of Covenant law. If an individual turns to seeking ongoing divine judicial approval by means of obedience to Covenant law, then they are rendered idle and inactive away from the Messiah, [they] have dropped away from the freely extended favour’. These two Covenants are mutually exclusive. They are two different orders of priesthood. 

By contrast, we Christians ‘are eagerly awaiting judicial approval with confident expectation from out of Breathful persuasion’…NOT by seeking to observe all of the written codes of Covenant law. Thus we come back to Paul’s earlier statement, that ‘within Jesus the anointed one, neither circumcision nor foreskin has any power, strength or ability’  - there is no difference, there is neither Jew nor Gentile. Where is the power, strength or ability? It is found in ‘persuasion to the point of obedience, effectively working by means of practical beneficial love’ – persuasion carried across into the primary fruit of the set apart Breath of God – practical beneficial love. 

Galatians 4 v 30, 31, 5 v 1a - The exclusion of Hagar the slave girl and her son Ishmael from the inheritance

 ‘But what is Scripture saying? ‘Be throwing out the slave girl and her son, because the son of the slave girl will absolutely not inherit in company with the son of the free woman’. 31 Therefore on this basis brothers, we are absolutely not children of the slave girl, but on the contrary, of the free woman, the free’, (Galatians 4 v 30, 31, 5 v 1a).

Paul refers to the language of Sarah to Abraham when she requested him to throw out Hagar and Ishmael, (Genesis 21 v 10). Her words received endorsement, ‘And rulers and judges said to Abraham, ‘Don’t let it be displeasing in your sight because of the boy or your concubine. All, whatever Sarah has said to you, listen and pay attention to her voice, because your seed will be called out within Isaac’, (Genesis 21 v 12). Thus, as the Galatians could read for themselves in the Scriptures, delegated rulers and judges said that Hagar and Ishmael were indeed to be sent away from Abraham’s family. The son of the slave girl was not to share the inheritance with Isaac. In the same way, on this account, all Jews who continue to exist under 'Jerusalem' and the legal Covenant of Sinai, enslaved to seeking to obtain judicial approval by observing its written codes of law, are excluded from the ‘family’ of those brought forth as a result of the announced promise. They are excluded from the divine inheritance. Thus Jesus says to Jews, ‘Struggle to go in by means of the narrow door. For I am saying to you, many will seek after entering in and will not be able, 25 away from which the master of the house having roused up and shut the door. And you begin to stand outside, knocking the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us’. Answering, he will say to you, ‘I don’t know you, from what place you are’. 26 Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in front of you, and you taught in our streets’. 27 And he will say, ‘I am telling you, I don’t know where you are from, stand away from me all workers of injustice. 28 There will be the lamentation and the grinding of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets within the Kingdom of God, but you being thrown out. 29 They will come from the east and west, and from north and south, and will recline in the Kingdom of God. 30 And look! Those existing last who will be first, and those existing first who will be last’, (Luke 13 v 24 – 30). 

Paul comes to a conclusion. ‘Therefore on this basis brothers…’. They are his brothers on account of being fellow Jews, but more especially they are his brothers because along with Paul, they ‘are absolutely not children of the slave girl, but on the contrary, of the free woman, the free’. Paul applies the allegory and brings it to its conclusion. Paul said earlier ‘Now if you [are] of the anointed, then you are existing Abraham’s seed, heirs down from announced promise’, (Galatians 3 v 29). And again, So therefore, you are no longer existing a slave, but if a son by means of God, also an heir, allotted a share, (Galatians 4 v 7). His logic then is this, if we are heirs, ‘we are not children of the slave girl’, whose son, according to Scripture, was ‘not to be heir’ (verse 30). But we are of the free woman whose son was, according to Scripture, to be heir. We Hebrew Christians are not ‘thrown out’ like Ishmael, but accepted as sons and heirs in God’s household on the basis of God’s announced promise.

Galatians 4 v 28, 29 - The children and heirs of God’s announced promise

 ‘But you brothers are down from Isaac, are children of announced promise. 29 But just as at that time the one having been procreated down from flesh persecuted the down from Breath, [Pneuma], in this manner also at this present time. 30 But what is Scripture saying? ‘Throw out the slave girl and her son, because the son of the slave girl will absolutely not inherit in company with the son of the free’. 31 Therefore on this account brothers, we are absolutely not children of the slave girl, but on the contrary, of the free’, (Galatians 4 v 28, 29).

‘But you brothers are down from Isaac’. Paul continues the allegory that he introduced in verse 23. He is not talking about physical descent from Abraham and Isaac, but about a line of ‘children of promise’, as he confirms in the next phrase – you ‘are children of announced promise’. Remember, Paul is speaking to and about Jews, and the contrast is between -

Jews existing under the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of law, and

 

Jews existing under the announced promise of God, by means of entrustment

The allegory describes -

Jews under the Sinai Covenant in terms of Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael

Jews under the announced promise in terms of Abraham, Sarah and Isaac

Scripture describes the animosity between Ishmael, born of the flesh, and Isaac who was brought forth as a result of the announced promise, down from the Breath. The particular reference made by Paul is doubtless to Genesis 21 v 9 where Ishmael treated Isaac with ‘outright scornful laughing’, jeering and deriding him. Jewish commentators pretty much also agree that Ishmael took his bow and shot an arrow at Isaac, with an intention to kill him, though he pretended it was but in play. The incident is recorded in the non-canonical Book of Jasher. ‘And Ishmael the son of Abraham was grown up in those days; he was fourteen years old when Sarah bare Isaac to Abraham. 12 And God was with Ishmael the son of Abraham, and he grew up, and he learned to use the bow and became an archer. 13 And when Isaac was five years old he was sitting with Ishmael at the door of the tent. 14 And Ishmael came to Isaac and seated himself opposite to him, and he took the bow and drew it and put the arrow in it, and intended to slay Isaac. 15 And Sarah saw the act which Ishmael desired to do to her son Isaac, and it grieved her exceedingly on account of her son, and she sent for Abraham and said to him, ‘Cast out this bondwoman and her son, for her son shall not be heir with my son, for thus did he seek to do unto him this day’.’, (Book of Jasher 21 v 11 – 15). Other commentators suggest that there was also contention about the inheritance, which Sarah’s words to Abraham seem to confirm. Ishmael claimed the birthright, despising Isaac as the younger son, and insisting on his right to the inheritance. He mocked the promise of God with respect to Isaac and threatened what he intended to do to Isaac should Isaac claim it.  Mocking has been always reckoned as a form of persecution.

Paul applies this animosity to the present situation. Just as Ishmael persecuted Isaac, so now at this present time, Jews under the Sinai Covenant with its written codes of law pursue and persecute Jews, and indeed Gentiles, who are ‘down from the Breath’.

Galatians 4 v 27 - The cry of the deserted woman and her children

 ‘For it has been written: ‘Be well understanding, the barren, the not bringing forth, break forth and shout, the one not labouring in birth pangs; because many the children of the desolate woman, more than of her possessing the husband’, (Galatians 4 v 27).

The quotation Paul refers to is from Isaiah. ‘‘Cry out, you sterile, not bringing forth; burst forth a ringing cry and cry shrilly you not writhing in birth pains, because many more the sons of the desolated woman than sons from the married woman’, says Yahweh’, (Isaiah 54 v 1). 

‘Jerusalem above’ - the delegated leadership and leadership infrastructure within the heavenly realm - is free and unbound, (verse 26). This statement is placed in contrast to ‘Jerusalem below at this present time’ - the enslaved delegated leadership and infrastructure of Israel. Given this context, the ‘the barren and not bringing forth’ refers to ‘Jerusalem at this present time’. The delegated rulers, authorities and judges of Israel – metaphorically referred to as ‘Jerusalem’ – are barren and not bringing forth, and are enslaved to law and flesh. Thus the delegated rulers, judges and authorities in Israel - ‘Jerusalem’ - are exhorted to be ‘well understanding’ (verse 27), to perceive their position and to ‘cry out with a ringing, shrill cry’, (Isaiah 54 v 1). The phrase ‘well understanding’ is from the Greek word ‘euphrainó’, usually translated into English as ‘Rejoice’, ‘Sing’, or ‘Be glad’, but it is actually an imperative to have a ‘good mind’. It can indeed refer to rejoicing and being glad, but this is not necessarily the case, and such a meaning is not intended here. In Isaiah the Hebrew word is ‘ranan’, meaning is ‘to cry out’, ‘to shout’. This is not a call to rejoice or be glad – just the opposite. Isaiah 54 ultimately leads to a prophecy concerning the Millennium Reign and the restoration of Israel. In verse 1 Israel is in a barren state and the call is to cry out. In verse 2 expansion is exhorted, because in verse 3 and the verse following, their restoration is prophesied. 

In Galatians it is the enslaved delegated leadership and leadership infrastructure of Israel, and given the quote from Isaiah, Israel itself, that is to cry out and shout with a shrill voice. Why? ‘Because many the children of the desolated woman, more than of her possessing the husband’ and ‘because many more the sons of the desolated woman than sons from the married woman’. 

By way of explanation Paul continues to refer to Hagar and Sarah. Hagar, points to the Sinai Covenant and its written codes, she is the ‘desolated woman’. The Greek word is ‘erémos’ meaning ‘deserted, abandoned’. Following the birth of Sarah’s son, Isaac, immediate animosity arose between Ishmael and Isaac, and between Sarah and Hagar, such that Sarah insisted to Abraham that Hagar and Ishmael be removed. Accordingly they were given some provisions and sent away into the desert – they were ‘deserted’. However, earlier, an angel/messenger had delivered a promise to Hagar, as recorded in Genesis 16 v 10, ‘I will greatly multiply your offspring so that they will be too numerous to count’. Hagar fled toward Egypt, and when in despair at the want of water, an angel/messenger again appeared to her, pointed out a supply of water close by, and renewed the former promises to her, (Genesis 21 v 9 - 21). Ishmael afterwards established himself in the wilderness of Paran, where he married an Egyptian, (Genesis 21 v 20, 21). Paul will refer to some of these events in verse 30. 

In the allegory here in Galatians, Hagar and her descendants point to Israel’s delegated rulers, and Israel’s leadership infrastructure at present, together with Jews themselves, as being enslaved under the Sinai Covenant with its written codes of law, from whom God's honour and praiseworthiness has departed. They are compared to Hebrew Christians who are described as ‘sons of the married woman’ – Sarah, who is free and unbound. 

Why is Israel to be ‘well understanding, and break forth and shout’? Because many are those who are under the Sinai Covenant, whereas few are brought forth by means of the announced promise. Jesus put what is being referred to here in another way - ‘Wide the gate and broad the way leading towards ruin and loss, and many are those going through it. Because small the gate and pressed in the way leading towards Life, and few are those finding it’, (Matthew 7 v 13, 14). There are many more descendants of Abraham who are seeking divine approval by means of Covenant law, leading to their ruin, loss and withering away, than there are descendants of Abraham who are children of God’s announced promise leading towards Life. 

Galatians 4 v 24b – 26 - Jerusalem and Jerusalem above

 ‘For these are two set arrangements, one indeed away from Mount Sinai, penetrating towards bringing forth enslavement – which is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai within Arabia, and she ranks together with Jerusalem at this present time, because she is a slave in company with her children. 26 But Jerusalem above, who is our mother, is free and unbound’, (Galatians 4 v 24b - 26).

The later imposition of chapter and verse numbers onto the original text, whilst very useful for reference purposes, does not always fit well with the logical reasoning of the Apostle. Such is the case here, where I have to divide verses in half in order to bring out the structure of Paul’s logical argument.

These two events, 

Ishmael brought forth down from flesh

by means of Hagar, the slave-woman and thus

born a slave

Isaac brought forth by means of an announced promise

by means of Sarah, wife and free-woman, and thus

born free and unbound

speak allegorically to Jews by pointing to two Covenants or set arrangements. 

Hagar points to the Covenant away from Mount Sinai, with its attendant written codes of law given to Jews, that penetrates towards bringing forth enslavement as we have seen in the previous verses. That is the first part of Paul’s argument here. Hagar points to the set arrangement under which many Jews labour and work to attain divine approval by means of their own ability and strength as they seek to observe the written codes of Sinai Covenant law. But this leads to their enslavement to the impulses of their own fleshly constitution and to being tied to self-forfeiture and loss. 

That is what Paul explains in verse 25. ‘Now Hagar is Mount Sinai within Arabia, and she ranks together with Jerusalem at this present time’.  The first clause has been the subject of much conflicting opinion. The reading of the Greek text is itself much debated, and in the original manuscripts it appears in a great variety of forms. But detailed discussion of this latter point would be out of place here. 

So let’s break down what Paul is saying into manageable pieces. ‘Now Hagar is Mount Sinai’ means that Hagar allegorically points to Mount Sinai. ‘Mount Sinai’ refers to the whole Covenant infrastructure for Jews that was brought forth from there at the time of Moses. So the Levitical priests, injunctions of law and so on were brought forth from Sinai as part of the Sinai Covenant. 

Then Paul introduces a new element of this allegory. Hagar is ‘in alignment together with’ or ‘marches in order together with’ ‘Jerusalem at this present time’. Hagar resembles Jerusalem at the time of the Apostle. In metaphorical terms, ‘Jerusalem’ points to the delegated leadership infrastructure of Jews – of the temple, the high priest, priests, sacrifices, Covenant laws and so on. Why does Hagar allegorically point to Mount Sinai and Jerusalem at the time of the Apostle? ‘Because she is a slave in company with her children’. The delegated leadership of Jews, together with their infrastructure, meant that Jews and their leaders were existing within enslavement. ‘With her Children’ means ‘all who are dependent upon her’ - the Jewish system and all who belong to it. Israel’s delegated leadership and leadership infrastructure is portrayed as a mother bringing forth her children. But the delegated leadership authority of Jews, along with those dependent upon it, were in subjection to and enslaved to many legal observances, and under a sentence of divine condemnation if they committed the least wilful offence. In literal terms they were also in bondage to the Romans to whom they were now tributaries as an occupying force. 

Paul then contrasts ‘Jerusalem at this present time’ with ‘Jerusalem above’. This maintains the interpretation of ‘Jerusalem’ in allegorical terms as the ‘delegated leadership infrastructure’ of God’s chosen people. But the reference here is not to delegated leaders such as the high priest, or the Sanhedrin, or Levitical priests and scribes, but to God and His delegated rulers and authorities in the unseen heavenly realm. ‘Jerusalem above, who is our mother, is free’. Christians, including Hebrew Christians, are those chosen by God and brought forth down from the government and delegated leadership above, in the unseen heavenly realm. It is God, and His anointed deliverer and the set-apart clean Breath that bring forth Christians, as a free gift, free from slavery to the written codes of divine law and condemnation.  

Thus we have – 

Hagar 

Represents the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of law

Stands in line with present day Jerusalem

‘Jerusalem’ is a metaphor for Israel’s leadership and infrastructure

‘Jerusalem’ is enslaved in company with her children

But,

Jerusalem above 

Is the leadership and infrastructure within the heavenly realm

Constitutes the Christian’s ‘mother’

Is free and unbound

Galatians 4 v 23, 24a - Hagar and Sarah, allegories of two Covenants [2]

 ‘But on the one hand, the from out of the slave girl was brought forth down from flesh; but the from out of the free by means of an announced promise, 24 which are speaking allegorically. For these are two set arrangements’, (Galatians 4 v 23, 24a).

Paul makes one last attempt to restore the Hebrew Christians who were turning back to Covenant law, and he addresses their failure to listen to divine law so as to hear or comprehend what it says. He turns their attention to their patriarch, Abraham, and the birth of his two sons, Ishmael and Isaac. He contrasts them like this – 

Ishmael was brought forth down from flesh

By means of Hagar, the slave-woman and thus

born a slave

Isaac was brought forth by means of an announced promise

By means of Sarah, his wife and free-woman, and thus

born free

Paul says that these are ‘speaking allegorically’. The Greek word is ‘allégoreó’ - from ‘allos’, meaning ‘other’, and ‘agoreuó’, meaning ‘to speak in the assembly or broad gathering’. The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, nor is it found in the Septuagint, though it often occurs in the classic writers. An ‘allegory’ is a sustained metaphor in which known events and experiences are used as ‘stepping stones’ to point to unseen realities. Paul says that Abraham’s situation says something to Jews in general, something other than what the words themselves imply. Within the Jewish assembly or community, they speak beyond the literal sense, in a way that reveals a hidden or parallel truth, often pointing to unseen heavenly realities. Sarah and Hagar were allegorised by Philo the Jew, before Paul did so. 

The allegory points to ‘two set arrangements’, (verse 24a). The Greek word is ‘diathéké’, usually translated into English as ‘covenant’ - a set-arrangement or disposition that has complete terms determined by the initiating party. The Apostle goes on to explain what these covenants are. They point to the difference between those who rested in the Messiah only, and those who trusted in obeying the law, and this is pointed to by the histories of these two women and their sons, as Paul goes on to explain.

Galatians 4 v 21 – 24a - Hagar and Sarah, allegories of two Covenants [1]

 ‘Tell me, those wishing to exist under law, are you not listening to and comprehending law? 22 Because it is written that Abraham had two sons, one from out of the slave girl, and one from out of the free, unbound woman. 23 But on the one hand, the from out of the slave girl was procreated down from flesh; but the from out of the free by means of an announced promise, 24 which are speaking allegorically, because these are two set arrangements’, (Galatians 4 v 21 – 24a).

After gathering his thoughts together, Paul has one last attempt to restore the Hebrew Christians who were turning back to Covenant law. He addresses them directly and begins to point out their inconsistency. You who are ‘wishing to exist under law, are you not listening to and comprehending law?’. He implies that they are turning to Covenant law but are not listening to it so as to hear or comprehend what it says. 

He turns their attention once again to their patriarch, Abraham, from whom Jews were keen to show their physical descent. Abraham was married to Sarah who was ‘barren’, or unable to bear children. Nevertheless, God announced a promise to Abraham that he would have a son. However, the promise of a son was not immediately fulfilled, and the years went by. So after a time, Abraham and Sarah concluded that since Sarah was barren, God must mean that Abraham would have a son by means of him entering into union with their slave-girl, making Hagar Abraham’s concubine. So Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham so that he would not be completely without descendants, and in this way fulfil God’s promise, (Genesis 16 v 3). The son of Abraham and Hagar was named Ishmael. But God told Abraham that Ishmael was not the announced promised son. In due course, contrary to expectation, Sarah became pregnant and gave birth to Isaac, who was the son of the announced promise. Thus Paul tells us, it is written that Abraham had two sons, one from out of the slave girl and one from out of the free, unbound woman’ (verse 22). The word ‘freewoman’ is never applied to Sarah in the story in Genesis, not even in the Genesis passage that is freely quoted later in verse 30, but it is an obviously true description, and it is introduced in complete fairness as an antithesis to Hagar. 

Abraham’s two sons are contrasted in this way –

   

Ishmael was procreated down from flesh

born a slave

Isaac by means of an announced promise

born free

Now why did Paul decide to look at the events surrounding Abraham and the birth of his two sons? It is because these two situations are ‘speaking allegorically, because these are two set arrangements’. Paul will go on to explain what he means. 

Galatians 4 v 12 – 20 - The Apostle Paul’s exasperation with Christians under the influence of legalists

 ‘I am imploring you brothers, become even like me, [ego], because I also am like you. You have wronged me in nothing. 13 But you know that by means of weakness of the flesh I previously announced and proclaimed the good news to you, 14 and within your putting my flesh to proof, not despising or treating with contempt, nor spitting out in disgust. But you received me like a messenger from God, like Jesus the anointed. 15 Therefore, where is your benefit? For I am bearing you witness, that if possible, your eyes having been gouged out, you would haven them to me. 16 So have I become your hateful enemy, speaking the truth to you? 17 They are not burning with passion after you in the right way, but are separating and excluding you. They wish that you might be passionate and zealous after them. 18 But it is good to be zealous within good and virtue at all times, and not only within my being present with you. 19 My children, whom I am once more labouring in birth pangs as far as that the anointed is formed and fashioned within you, 20 I am indeed wishing to be present with you at this moment and to be changing my tone, because I am without a way within you’, (Galatians 4 v 12 – 20).

Paul implores the Hebrew Christians to be like him because like them he is a Jew, and a Hebrew Christian, himself. Despite the strength of his letters, Paul was not an eloquent, gifted orator. He was described as ‘unimpressive in person’ and he declared the gospel in the weakness of his flesh, yet the Jews in Galatia received him with warmth and loyalty. But where is their benefit? Paul asks if he has become their hated enemy because he is speaking the truth to them. 

Paul then turns his attention to the Jews who had come into Galatia away from James – the ‘Judaizers’ who were leading Peter and Barnabas astray and insisting that male Gentile Christians be circumcised as required by Covenant law. These Jews were passionate, burning with zeal, focused and intense. But not in the right way, says Paul. By turning Hebrew Christians back to Covenant law, they were being divisive, separating and excluding Hebrew Christians away from Gentile Christians. He accuses these Jews as being self-interested and wanting their fellow countrymen to be passionate and zealous after them. Paul acknowledges that to be zealous at all times is praiseworthy, as long as such passion is within the boundaries of what is good and virtuous. He does not expect the Hebrew Christians to put on a zealous, passionate attitude for show only at the times when he was present with them.

If you are a Christian who has been or is exasperated in relating to Christian legalists, then you are not alone. Paul is exasperated with these Hebrew Christians who are being drawn back under Covenant law. He longs to be present with them, and he finds himself ‘once more labouring in birth pangs as far as that the anointed is formed and fashioned within you’. He is right back to basics with them, seeking to be present with them to assist in bringing them forth so that the Messiah is formed and fashioned within them, then he can change his tone and manner with them. Finally he says ‘I am without a way within you’. He does not know what to do or say next. 

Galatians 4 v 9 – 11 - Legalism - Christians turning to Covenant law is a backward step

 ‘But at this present time, having known God, or rather, having been known under God, how are you turning back once more on the basis of weak and destitute basic principles which you are desiring to be enslaved to afresh once more? 10 You are scrupulously observing days, months, seasons and years. 11 I am fearful for you in case I have perhaps laboured towards you penetrating into no purpose’, (Galatians 4 v 9 – 11).

Paul applies what he has just been saying to those Hebrew Christians who were turning back to the written codes of Covenant law. He says, ‘At this present time, you know God – or to put it in a better way, you have been known under God – so why are you turning back? Why are you going backwards, turning back once more on the basis of weak, destitute, rudimentary principles? (Galatians 3 v 23, 24; 4 v 1 – 3). Why do you desire to be enslaved to the Sinai Covenant, it’s written codes of law, and human nature once again?’ 

What is it that these Hebrew Christians were doing? They were ‘scrupulously observing days, months, seasons and years’. They were being very careful in observing Jewish Sabbaths and other fasting-days or festivals right down to observing specific single days. Jews had also added many other days, such as commemorating the destruction and rebuilding of the temple, and other important events in their history. Then there was the observance of the first day of the month, the new moon, and they were also paying close attention to seasons, such as the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. They were observing years, such as the sabbatical year, which was about the time of the writing this Epistle, and the year of jubilee. 

Paul sums this situation up by saying ‘I am fearful for you in case I have perhaps laboured towards you penetrating into no purpose’. These Hebrew Christians had gone so far backwards down this route of observing the law that they had reached a point where Paul wondered whether they were Christians after all. He begins to speculate whether his endeavours have been without purpose, without a viable result.

Galatians 4 v 4 – 8 - Christians – adopted sons and heirs

 ‘But when the completion of the season had come, God sent away His son, having  come into being from out of a woman, having come into being under law, 5 in order that he buy back those under law, in order that we receive placing as a son. 6 And because you are sons, God sends forth the Breath of His Son penetrating into our hearts, our deep inner core, crying aloud and shrieking ‘Abba, Father!’. 7 So therefore, you are no longer existing a slave, but if a son by means of God, also an heir, allotted a share. 8 But indeed, at that time, absolutely not knowing God, you were the enslaved by nature, lest being gods’, (Galatians 4 v 4 - 8). 

Paul has just said that Jews existed like under-age heirs, enslaved under the orderly system of rudimentary elements and first principles of the Sinai Covenant with its written codes of law, until the time appointed by the Father. That season of under-age enslavement of Jews was completed when ‘God sent away His son’. The only-begotten Son pre-existed his ‘coming into being from out of a woman’. Indeed, the Son of God is ‘the image of the invisible God, firstborn of the whole in terms of the individual parts of what is originally formed’, (Colossians 1 v 15). ‘By means of him all came into being, and apart from him, not even one was caused to be that has come into being’, (John 1 v 3). Thus ‘God sent away His son’ from out of the heavenly realm to ‘come into being from out of a woman, having come into being under law’. God’s purpose was ‘that [His son] buy back those under law, in order that we receive placing as a son'. The details of this forms the details of the gospel or ‘good news’ of course. But Paul is not interested here in explaining the gospel in detail. He is interested to present the concept of ‘sonship’, because ‘if children, also heirs, indeed, God’s heirs, and fellow-heirs with the Messiah’, (Romans 8 v 17). 

But there is more, ‘because you are sons, God sends forth the Breath of His Son penetrating into our hearts, our deep inner core’. Over the course of his writings, Paul places two pairs of principles that are in opposition to one another - 

     Covenant Law vs God’s Promise (Galatians)

    Fleshly impulses towards death vs Breath penetrating into Life (Romans 7, 8)

The Breath of the Messiah penetrating within the Christian’s heart, including the heart or deep inner core of Hebrew Christians, is ‘crying aloud and shrieking ‘Abba, Father!’. 

Paul then reaches his conclusion in verses 7 and 8. ‘So therefore, you are no longer existing a slave, but if a son by means of God, also an heir, allotted a share. 8 But indeed, at that time, absolutely not knowing God, you were the enslaved by nature, lest being gods’ 

Paul’s conclusion is that Jews who are entrusting the Messiah are adopted sons and fellow heirs with the Messiah as a result of God fulfilling His promises through giving His only-begotten son and His Breath. Hebrew Christians are no longer enslaved to Covenant law, and no longer ‘the enslaved by nature’, by the impulses of their flesh. Why? Because of the opposing impetus and movement of the Breath of God within them in their deepest inner core. But previously, before entrusting the Messiah, Jews were enslaved, by their own human nature. Paul then adds sarcastically, ‘lest being gods’ – unless you Jews were gods with superhuman ability and strength. 

Galatians 4 v 1 – 3 - Divine law – A rudimentary system for infants

 ‘Now on this basis I am saying however long the time that the heir, existing owner of all, is an infant, he is carried across nothing different than a slave, 2 existing rather under tutors and house managers up until the time appointed beforehand by the father. 3 In this manner we also, were enslaved at the time we existed infants, under the row of rudiments of the ordered system’, (Galatians 4 v 1 - 3).   

Paul has just said that Hebrew Christians, like Gentile Christians, exist as Abraham’s seed (plural), heirs down from God’s announced promise. Having introduced the concept of heirs of the divine inheritance, he now begins to expand on this theme. 

He presents the illustration of a single heir who is still not yet of sufficient age to take full control of what he possesses. Such a young infant heir may own everything, but he is carried across just like a slave. Because he is still a child, he does not make decisions about buying and selling his possessions or about investments. Such decisions are made on his behalf and he has no say in the matter. He is under the authority of trustees – of house managers and governors. He does as he is told until he reaches the age, determined by his father, that he is able to take full control and possession of his inheritance. 

Paul then applies this to Jews, ‘In this manner we also’. Although they were God’s chosen ethnic group, Jews nevertheless existed as infants before the Messiah came. They were like children enslaved to the rudimentary, first principles of the ordered system.  The ‘ordered system’ is that of the Sinai Covenant with its written codes of law, as he says later, ‘scrupulously observing days, months, seasons and years’. 

Many translations read, ‘enslaved under the basic principles of the world’, but the word ‘world’ is not present in the Greek. The word ‘stoicheion’ means ‘rudimentary elements’, ‘orderly arrangement’, or ‘first principles’, and though often associated with the world so as to mean ‘the orderly arrangement of the world’ it does not necessarily refer to ‘the world’. Paul is talking here to Jews. The context of these verses is that Paul is talking to Jewish Christians about the law. So I suggest that the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of laws is the orderly system of rudimentary elements and first principles that Jews were enslaved under, existing like under-age heirs until the time appointed by the Father – the coming of the promised Messiah. This interpretation seems to be confirmed by what Paul says next. 

Galatians 3 v 25 – 29 - Christians – Their union in the Messiah

 ‘But confident persuasion and entrustment having come, we are no longer under a child’s governor. 26 Because you are all sons of God by means of persuasion and entrustment within Jesus, His anointed. 27 For as many as have been immersed  - there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, and there is neither male and female, because you all exist one within Jesus the anointed. 29 Now if you [are] of the anointed, then you are existing Abraham’s seed, heirs down from announced promise’, (Galatians 3 v 25 - 29).

What happens when a Jew penetrates towards persuasion and entrustment? Paul says that such Jews ‘are no longer under a child’s governor’. They are no longer under the authority and government of Covenant law (verse 24). Recognising their need of the promise given by God to Abraham, in the light of the extent of their self-forfeiture and loss as revealed by Covenant law, they are persuaded and entrust God. 

Now that the Messiah has been revealed, this rendering idle of divine law is especially the case for those Jews who have heard the gospel and placed their trust in Jesus as their Messiah – Hebrew Christians. Why? ‘Because you are all sons of God by means of persuasion and entrustment within Jesus, His anointed’. Hebrew Christians ‘are no longer under a child’s governor’. They are no longer under the authority and government of Covenant law because by means of persuasion to the point of obedient entrustment within Jesus, God’s anointed, all such Jews are sons of God. They have received divine adoption into the household of God. But what does this mean? What are the implications?

Paul returns to the theme of ‘oneness’. ‘For as many as have been immersed within His anointed have sunk into being enclothed with the anointed one’. Those who entrust Jesus, the anointed of God, are immersed, submerged or baptised, implying enclothing, being ‘wrapping around’, and a very close and intimate relationship. What are they immersed into? They have been immersed ‘within His anointed’, by which believers are placed into mystical union with the crucified and risen Lord, the means of this union being the set-apart Breath of God. The result is that believers have ‘sunk into being enclothed with the anointed one’. They have sunk into the Messiah in the same way that someone sinks into a garment, into clothing. ‘Putting on’ the Messiah implies that his character, feelings and works become the believer’s own. The believer has received God’s anointed as the means of their judicial approval, have obtained union with him, and in consequence a likeness to him – walking around within his clothes.

Now this is true of all who are persuaded and entrusting the Messiah, be they Jews or Gentiles. There is no difference ‘because you all exist one within Jesus the anointed’. There we see the theme of ‘oneness’ once again. The God of Sinai Covenant law is one and the same as the God of promise, and those hearing, persuaded and entrusting in Jesus ‘all exist one within Jesus His anointed’, denoting the closest and most intimate approximation conceivable. We see it again here, ‘you (Christians) [are] of the anointed (Messiah), and the anointed (Messiah) of God’ (I Corinthians 3 v 23).

Paul now reaches a sub-conclusion and in doing so he continues to explain the Christian’s position in relation to divine law. He will explain this over the first eleven verses of chapter 4. His sub-conclusion is this, ‘Now if you [are] of the anointed, then you are existing Abraham’s seed, heirs down from announced promise’. Paul is applying what is true of Christians specifically to Hebrew Christians and he links existing ‘within the Messiah’ to their patriarch Abraham and the promises made to him by God. 

If you [are] of the Anointed,

Then you are existing Abraham’s seed (plural), and

        Heirs down from announced promise.

Paul introduces the theme of inheritance. Hebrew Christians are no longer in the situation of experiencing the loss of their inheritance because of their self-forfeiture. On the contrary, they are heirs down from the announced promise to Abraham.

Galatians 3 v 23, 24 - Covenant law – a guardian for infants

 ‘Now persuasion and entrustment came in front. Under the law we were guarded, protected and kept watch over, enclosed and shut in together penetrating into the persuasion and entrustment intended to be uncovered, 24 so that the law has come into being our guardian and tutor of children, penetrating into His Anointed, in order that we might be judicially approved and made right wise from out of persuasion and entrustment’, (Galatians 3 v 23, 24).

Persuasion and entrustment, like that of Abraham’s, came first, long before the law. Then, for Jews, over four hundred years later, the law was added. Jews, who are God’s chosen ethnic group, came to exist under the authority of Covenant law, they ‘were guarded, protected and kept watch over, enclosed and shut in together’. Covenant law was (and is) not given as a means to divine judicial approval. It was not (and is not) an alternative to, or a means of fulfilment of, that which was made known by the announced promise of God to Abraham. The function of the law was (and is) to penetrate into persuasion and entrustment, as individuals under the law came to know their self-forfeiture and hopeless position. The function of Covenant law was (and is) to enable individuals to perceive their need of God’s promise. The law provides knowledge of self-forfeiture, it is the starting point that reveals the sinfulness of sin, and the extent and increase of sin within our fleshly constitution. The law does indeed lead wayward Jews to entrustment in God. The particular details of how God would bring His promises into effect, and what this entrustment would mean in particular, were yet to be revealed. Jews were in a state of infancy.

Covenant law came in towards Jews like a tutor or guardian of children or infants. It points out what God judicially disapproves of and indicates the penalties that certain behaviours incur. The law also provided the means of paying for and sending away self-forfeiture and loss by means of the infrastructure of Levitical priests and the various prescribed ceremonies and sacrifices. All of this constitutes an ‘outline shadow’ pointing to, and penetrating into His Anointed and judicial approval by means of hearing, persuasion and entrustment in him.  

That was the position of Jews prior to the coming of the Messiah. It remains the position of those Jews who are still not persuaded that Jesus is the Messiah and who therefore do not place their trust in him.

Galatians 3 v 21 – 22 - The written codes of law are not how God’s promises are fulfilled

 ‘Therefore, is the law down from the announced promises of God? May it not be caused to happen! Because if law had been given having ability to give Life, indeed, the judicial approval and right wise-ness would exist from out of law. 22 But the Scripture shut up and enclosed all things underneath self-forfeiture and loss in order that the announced promise be given from out of entrustment and persuasion, to those who are persuaded and entrusting Jesus, His Anointed’, (Galatians 3 v 21 – 22).

In verses 19 and 20, Paul said that the God of the Sinai Covenant and its written codes of laws is one and the same as the God Who announced promises to Abraham. There is divine unity in spite of the various different aspects in which God reveals Himself to successive generations and different groups of humanity. Paul defines the implications of this in the following verses, and he considers another potential objection, which he once again expresses in the form of a rhetorical question - ‘Therefore is the law down from the announced promises of God?’ He immediately answers his own question, ‘May it not be caused to happen!’. 

This question proposes that God is fulfilling His promises to Abraham and his seed by giving Covenant law. In other words, it is proposed that Covenant law is the means by which God’s promises will be attained. ‘Not at all’ says Paul. ‘If it was possible that divine judicial approval could exist from out of individuals keeping the written codes of Covenant law, if Covenant law had the ability to give Life, then that would indeed be the arrangement that God would put in place’. But this is not possible, and Paul explains why.

‘Scripture shut up and enclosed all things underneath self-forfeiture and loss’. Self-forfeiture and loss encloses everyone. Everyone is trapped and imprisoned by self-forfeiture and loss, and there are no exceptions. There is an impulse and impetus inherent within our human nature, within the fabric of our flesh, inclining us towards self-forfeiture and loss. It is present within everyone, including those placed under Covenant law. Both Jews and Gentiles are trapped by it.

Why is this? Why does Scripture enclose everyone underneath self-forfeiture and loss? It is ‘in order that the announced promise be given from out of entrustment and persuasion, to those who are persuaded and entrusting Jesus, His Anointed’, (verse 22b). The announced promise given to Abraham – ‘in your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed’, (Genesis 22 v 18a), is not and cannot be attained by any individual expending their energy and labour to keep the written codes of Covenant law. This is because everyone is trapped and imprisoned within self-forfeiture and loss. This means that as with Abraham, the announced promise is received by means of persuasion and entrustment, and the ‘object’ of this persuasion and entrustment is Jesus, His Anointed, the seed of Abraham. Because of the all-pervading principle of self-forfeiture and loss, knowledge of which only increases by knowing divine law, it means that hearing, persuasion and entrustment is the means by which the announced promise is attained – in other words, the promise is attained by means of faith. 

Galatians 3 v 19, 20 - If God’s promise is still in effect, why was the law given? [2]

 ‘the law… was added on account of stepping contrary, up until that the seed comes to whom the announced promise [was made], having been arranged and ordered by means of angel/messengers within the hand of a mediator. 20 But a mediator is not one; and God is One’. (Galatians 3 v 19, 20).

Different commentators have given many different explanations with regard to Paul’s reference to a ‘mediator’. But they can be classified into three divisions based on who the ‘mediator’ is understood to be.

In the first centuries after Jesus, commentators understood the word ‘mediator’ to refer to Jesus and indeed, many passages in the New Testament use this word in reference to Jesus. But the word ‘mediator’ does not refer exclusively to Jesus. In addition, the problem with using this interpretation here in Galatians is that the context is obscured or lost, and the force of the Apostle’s argument weakened.

A more probable view is that in verse 20, as in verse 19, the mediator is Moses. This is in full agreement with the context of the passage. In verse 19 ‘the mediator,’ is undoubtedly Moses. However, the problem now is that what was true of Moses as a mediator is also true of every other human mediator. 

The third view is that the first half of verse 20 presents a general principle – the characteristic of a mediator as such. Mediation implies a transaction involving at least two parties, but the announced promises to Abraham came from God alone, and have His will as sole source and guarantee. Thus the announced promises are more sure and more elevated. God alone dealt directly with Abraham, without a mediator. The logic is that Covenant law is thus inferior to the announced promises, and that the Sinai Covenant is a transaction of quite a different nature to the promises.

But the difficulty now is to see the relevance of what Paul is saying to the logical argument he is making. What does he intend to illustrate? How does what he states about ‘oneness’ and ‘mediators’ illustrate his point? 

Sinai Covenant Law pertained to Jews as God’s chosen ethic group. Covenant law was not given to Gentiles. In the passage in Genesis that Paul refers to, I have pointed out that in the first part of Genesis 22 v 17, the words ‘seed’ and ‘sand’ are intended to be understood in the plural sense – ‘I will increase your seed according to the stars of the heavens and….the sand on the sea shore’. The reference is not to a single seed or grain of sand, (or to one star), but to one body of seed or sand. But then, in the second part of verse 17, as Paul has been arguing, the word ‘seed’ refers to one individual who ‘will take possession of the gate of his enemy’ – this individual seed being the Messiah.

So the words ‘seed’ and ‘sand’ support both plural and singular meanings depending on the context. They are metaphors that either point to, 

The Messiah [singular]

Those delivered by means of hearing – both Jews and Gentiles [plural]

Jews, who are physically descended from Abraham [plural]

The point that Paul is making is that God is one and the same in reference to all. His promises pertain to all. He is the one God of Jews, Gentiles and His anointed deliverer. By contrast, Moses was a mediator between God and the Israelites. Moses was not a mediator on behalf of Gentiles. Therefore Moses could not transact anything that would tend to the annulment of that aspect of the promises of God to both Jews and Gentiles. Paul’s purpose is to show that the giving of Covenant Law could not negate the promises announced to Abraham. The true force of the clause may be expressed like this – ‘but the God of Sinai is one and the same as the God of promise’. There is divine unity in spite of the various aspects in which God reveals Himself to successive generations and groups of humanity.

Having made this general statement, Paul will explain over the next nine verses how this relates to Christians, and he begins by considering another potential objection.

Galatians 3 v 19, 20 - If God’s promise is still in effect, why was the law given? [1]

 ‘Then why the law? It was added on account of stepping contrary up until that the seed comes to whom the announced promise [was made], having been arranged and ordered by means of angel/messengers within the hand of a mediator. 20 But a mediator is not one; and God is One’. (Galatians 3 v 19, 20).

Paul anticipates another objection. If judicial approval and right-wiseness is shown as the result of promises made by God to Abraham and his seed, promises given over four hundred years before the law, then why was the law given to Jews at all? Paul says that the law was added because Jews and their delegated leaders were ‘stepping contrary’. They were engaging in wayward teaching and disapproved-of behaviour. So the law was brought in until the seed – Jesus - to whom the announced promise was made, (verse 14) - came in. It was brought in because of waywardness.

Covenant law is not of human origin. It does not belong to human manufacture, tradition or philosophy. Rather, it was arranged and ordered by means of angel messengers. ‘Yahweh came from Sinai and rose up on them from Seir. He shone forth from Mount Paran and He came from a myriad of the set apart. From His right hand, a fiery law for them’, (Deuteronomy 33 v 2). And again, ‘who received the law into the arrangement of angels…’, (Acts 7 v 53). (See also Acts 7 v 38, Hebrews 2 v 2). Covenant law was delivered ‘within the hand of a mediator’, namely, Moses. Thus, Covenant law was not given to Israel in the same way that the promises were announced to Abraham. The promises were announced immediately from and directly by God Himself. By contrast, Moses served as an intermediary, a ‘middle man’ between God and the angels on one hand, and Israel on the other hand. 

Then Paul seems to add an unusual sentence. He says, ‘but a mediator is not one; but God is One’, (verse 20). The statement itself is plain enough in its meaning, but why does Paul say such a thing here? A mediator is a facilitator who helps parties resolve disputes through communication. In Scripture we read that almost immediately after leaving Egypt the Israelites engaged in wayward behaviour, (Exodus 32), incurring God’s judicial anger. But Moses pleaded on behalf of the Israelites, reminding God of his promises to Abraham, and in due course divine law was given to Israel by means of Moses. So a mediator is not ‘one’ – rather he is an intermediary, in the case of Moses, between God and His chosen ethnic group. But it is also true to say that Jesus is a mediator between God and those whom God has selected. So the first problem is this, who is Paul referring to when he says a ‘mediator is not one’? Paul contrasts a mediator with God, Who is one. The second problem is this, what does Paul mean by raising this theme of ‘oneness’? Many scholars and commentators have had their minds exercised by these questions, and they have come up with different answers. I will consider these themes a little more in the next post.

Galatians 3 v 17, 18 - Divine law does not negate God’s announced promise

 ‘Now I am saying this, the set arrangement has been confirmed in advance under God. Law, having come 430 years afterwards, is absolutely not invalidating or penetrating into to rendering the announced promise entirely idle. 18 Because if the inheritance is from out of law, [then it is] no longer from out of the announced promise. But God has shown favour to Abraham by means of an announced promise’, (Galatians 3 v 17, 18).

Paul clarifies what he has said in verses 14 -16 and anticipates a potential objection. He said that, ‘The announced promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed’, and the ‘seed’ is God’s Anointed, Jesus. ‘The benefit penetrating towards Abraham comes towards the Gentiles within Jesus, His Anointed. So that they receive the announced promise, the Breath, by means of faithful entrustment’ (verse 14). The potential objection is that Covenant Law, which came in later, overrides and invalidates the announced promise made to Abraham. 

Paul states that this is not the case. The set arrangement of faithful entrustment was confirmed in advance under the authority of God. The establishment of Covenant Law that was given some 430 years later, does not penetrate into rendering God’s promise idle. God promised a blessing, a divine inheritance. But if this blessing and inheritance is now from out of Covenant Law, by means of people expending energy and labour to observe its written injunctions, then this is a completely different arrangement. It would mean that the blessings and benefits of inheritance are no longer obtained from out of God’s announced promise. But the fact remains – ‘God has shown favour to Abraham by means of an announced promise’. Having established the set arrangement of an announced promise, the later establishment of Covenant Law did not and does not ignore it, negate it or add to it. God’s announced promise stands, and it is received by faithful entrustment.

Galatians 3 v 13 – 16 - Jesus and God’s announced promises to Abraham and his seed

 ‘His anointed has paid the price to rescue us from out of the law’s denouncement, having been denounced above and beyond us, because it has been written: ‘Denounced – all hanging on a tree’, 14 in order that the benefit penetrating towards Abraham comes towards the Gentiles within Jesus, His anointed. So that they receive the announced promise, the Breath, by means of faithful entrustment. 15 Brothers, I am speaking down from man, nevertheless, even man, having validated an agreed arrangement, no one sets it aside, negating it or adding to it. 16 The announced promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say ‘seeds’, on the basis of many, but on the basis of one – ‘and your seed’ – who is His anointed’, (Galatians 3 v 13 - 16). 

There is no individual human being who has the ability to fully construct all that is written in the book of law. Instead, everyone who seeks to observe the injunctions of the book of law finds that they are denounced by it. The law reveals that they incur self-forfeiture and loss, and that they face divine disapproval. 

So how can anyone obtain divine approval? How can they be delivered from divine condemnation? The answer is that God’s anointed – His only-begotten Son - ‘has paid the price to rescue us from out of the law’s denouncement’. The Messiah himself has been denounced above and beyond us, so that the benefit that penetrates towards Abraham also comes towards Gentiles, within Jesus. This means that Gentiles as well as Jews receive the announced promise, the Breath, by means of faithful entrustment. (Compare Joel 2 v 28, 29; Acts 2 v 16 - 21).

Paul says, ‘I illustrate this by a familiar example taken from common human practice. Even human beings, having established an agreement, don’t then ignore it, negate it or add to it without the consent of the other stipulating party’. This constitutes his next general statement. Namely that such an agreement is established and fixed. Nothing is going to come in from the side to make it invalid. 

Paul then explains what he means in more detail. ‘The announced promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed’, (verse 16). Paul refers to Genesis 22. ‘And Yahweh says, ‘I have sworn by Myself…17 that praising I will praise you, and increasing I will increase your seed according to the stars of the heavens, and according to the sand upon the sea shore. And your seed will take possession of the gate of his enemy. 18 And in your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed in consequence that you listened and obeyed My voice’.’, (Genesis 22 v 16a, 17, 18).

Paul comments on this text and says, ‘The announced promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say ‘seeds’, on the basis of many, but on the basis of one – ‘and your seed’ – who is His anointed’. In the first part of Genesis 22 v 17, the word ‘seed’ is intended to be understood in the plural sense – ‘according to the stars of the heavens and….the sand on the sea shore’. As with ‘stars’, the word ‘sand’ is to be understood in the same way. The reference is not to a single grain of sand, but to one body of sand made up of many grains.

Then, in the second part of verse 17, the word ‘seed’ refers to one individual, one seed out of many, who ‘will take possession of the gate of his enemy’. This phrase indicates conquest and victory. Similarly in verse 18, the word ‘seed’ refers to one individual within whom ‘all the ethnic groups of the earth, (not only Jews), will be blessed’. Paul says that this individual is God’s Anointed - Jesus.

Galatians 3 v 10 – 12 – Working to observe divine law is not out of entrustment and leads to condemnation

 ‘Because as many as are existing from out of law-works are existing under denouncement, because it has been written, ‘Denounced – all who are not continuing in all the writing within the book of law, constructing them’. 11 But because no one is judicially approved or made right-wise in the presence of God within law, it is clear that the judicially approved will live from out of entrusting persuasion, 12 and law is not from out of faith, on the contrary, they will live within having constructed them’, (Galatians 3 v 10 – 12).

a

Paul continues to construct support for his general statement that Christians receive the Breath from out of hearing and entrustment. He has shown that Gentiles or non-Jews are connected to the Jewish patriarch Abraham by means of hearing and entrustment. Paul now contrasts this with seeking to maintain divine approval by putting energy and effort into observing the written codes of Covenant law. He says that everyone who is trying to earn and maintain divine approval by putting energy and effort into observing the written codes of Covenant law, exists under denouncement, under a curse. The curse is that those who are following this path have to obey every single injunction in the book of law. Those who fail to do so, even within just one instance, are not judicially approved. They incur self-forfeiture and loss.  

No one is judicially approved by putting their energy and work into obeying the written codes of Covenant law. So as a result, it is clear, it is evident, that those who are judicially approved will live from out of entrustment and persuasion – faith. It is also clear that divine law is not from out of faith. These are two completely different paths. Those putting their energy and work into obeying the written codes of Covenant law will live IF they have fully and completely constructed all the writing, all the injunctions, in the book of law. ‘Do this and you will live’, ‘they will live within having constructed them’, (verse 12), but ‘no one is judicially approved in the presence of God within law’, (verse 11). People are not able to stand acquitted before God on Judgement Day by means of observing Covenant Law. Nor are Christians able to maintain divine judicial approval day-by-day by means of seeking to keep the written codes of Covenant law such as the Ten Commandments. 

Galatians 3 v 5 – 9 - God’s announced promise and Abraham’s entrustment

 ‘Therefore, the provision of the Breath to you, and the working activity of power within you - from out of law-works or from out of hearing and entrustment, 6 just as Abraham entrusted God and he reasoned it to a logical conclusion into judicial approval and right wise-ness. 7 Therefore perceive and know that those within entrustment, these are Abraham’s sons. 8 But the Scripture foresaw that the Gentiles are being judicially approved and made right wise from out of entrustment, because God declared beforehand to Abraham: All the ethnic races will be within benefit within you. 9 So then, those from out of entrustment are benefiting and spoken well of in company with persuaded Abraham’, (Galatians 3 v 5 – 9).

Paul continues to chastise the Galatian Christians who were turning to observing the written codes of Covenant law, and he begins to logically reason things through to a conclusion – ‘Therefore…’.  He expands on the contrast expressed in verse 2, ‘Did you receive the Breath [Pneuma] from out of law works, or from out of faithful hearing?’ Building on what he has just said about receiving the Breath through hearing and persuasion, and about the Breath and flesh being opposed to one another, he repeats the question. ‘Therefore, the provision of the Breath to you, and the working activity of power within you - from out of law-works or from out of hearing and entrustment’? (verse 5). 

Paul is primarily writing to Hebrew Christians – to Jews who have become Christians – so as part of his question he brings in the example of the Jewish patriarch, Abraham. ‘….from out of law-works or from out of hearing and entrustment, 6 just as Abraham entrusted God and he reasoned it to a logical conclusion into judicial approval and right-wiseness’. Paul leads his readers to an answer. He asks the question but then adds, ‘This is what our revered Jewish patriarch did’. What did Abraham do? He ‘entrusted God and reasoned it to a logical conclusion into judicial approval and right-wiseness’. In other words, Abraham did not follow Covenant law – indeed, there was no Covenant law at that time, the Sinai Covenant had not been given or established. So Abraham listened, entrusted God, and used his mind to reason things through to a logical conclusion. He became correct or right in his wisdom and thinking. Paul is suggesting that this is the process that the Hebrew Christians in Galatia should be following, not expending energy and labour to observe the written codes of divine law.  

 

‘Therefore perceive and know that those within entrustment, these are Abraham’s sons’, (verse 7). Having presented the Hebrew patriarch Abraham as a primary example to Jews of entrustment in God, and knowing that for Jews, being a descendant of Abraham is important, Paul says to these Jewish Christians that Abraham’s sons are those within the sphere of entrustment. Abraham’s true sons are not those by physical descent, but those living within the sphere of entrustment. Paul says a similar thing in his letter to the Romans in chapter 2 v 28, 29. 

Paul then adds further support to his general statement that Christians receive the Breath from out of hearing and entrustment. He says ‘the Scripture foresaw that the Gentiles are being judicially approved from out of entrustment, because God declared beforehand to Abraham: ‘All the ethnic races will be within benefit within you’,’, (verse 8). Paul connects Gentiles – those who are not Jews – to Jews by means of Abraham. Gentiles are not judicially approved by God by means of the energy and work that they invest in keeping Covenant law. Indeed, Covenant law was not given to Gentiles. ‘In the past, He let all ethnic groups go their own way’, (Acts 14 v 16). Gentiles are judicially approved from out of entrustment, from out of faith leading to obedience. God declared this to Abraham when He said ‘All the ethnic races will be within benefit within you’, (verse 8b).

Paul then reaches a sub-conclusion – ‘So then…’. His conclusion is this – ‘those from out of entrustment are benefiting and spoken well of in company with persuaded Abraham’, (verse 9). Those who are benefiting and spoken well of are not those who are turning to Covenant law, but those who are from out of faith.

Galatians 3 v 1 – 4 - The law, flesh and the Breath

 ‘Oh! Thoughtless Galatians. Who has fascinated you not to be persuaded of the truth, that mind’s eyes down, Jesus His Anointed was announced having been impaled on the cross? 2 I am only wishing to learn this away from you – Did you receive the Breath [Pneuma] from out of law-works, or from out of faithful hearing? 3 So are you not thinking and understanding? Having begun in Breath are you being made complete at this present time within flesh? 4 Have you experienced so much without basis, if indeed also without basis?’ (Galatians 3 v 1 – 4).

As I said earlier, Paul does not mince his words. He chastises the Hebrew Christians who were turning back to observing the written codes of Covenant law, and he says that they are not thinking. They seemed to initially embrace the gospel but Paul says that the gospel was announced to them and their ‘mind’s eye’, their perception and thoughtful insight, was ‘down’. ‘Who has distracted you’, says Paul, ‘Who has occupied your mind away from the gospel? I just want to know one thing, did you receive the Breath from out of your efforts and energies that you put into observing the written codes of divine law, or did you receive the Breath from out of hearing the gospel and being persuaded to the point of obedience?’ This is a rhetorical question because in his next statements Paul implies that they did not receive the Breath from out of their efforts to observe the written codes of Covenant law. This effectively constitutes Paul’s first general statement – 

Christians receive the Breath from out of hearing and entrustment

Paul continues his questioning of the Galatians. He says, ‘Given that you did not receive the Breath from out of your efforts to observe the written codes of Covenant law, is it that you are not thinking and understanding? You know that you began within Breath. So are you now being brought to completion within flesh?’ Paul is not merely talking about the Christian’s ultimate standing before God on Judgement Day. He is not merely talking about ‘justification’. He says that they ‘Began within faith’, but now Paul is concerned about how they are being brought to completion. In other words how are these Christians growing and maturing? How are they living their lives day-by day? 

Paul places Breath in contrast to flesh. As he says elsewhere, these oppose one another, their impetus and movement is in opposite directions. There we see his implied second general statement –

The movement of Breath and the energies of flesh oppose one another

The Hebrew Christians in Galatia had obviously experienced many things since they turned towards the Messiah, but Paul expresses his concern that such experiences may have been without purpose, that they are empty and without value because they do not have a proper basis. The proper basis is persuasion and entrustment in the Messiah. Seeking to maintain divine approval by expending energy and labour in observing the written codes of Covenant law is not a proper basis for divine approval or for maintaining cleanliness.

Galatians 2 v 20 – 21 - No judicial approval for people seeking to keep the law

 ‘I have been crucified together with His Anointed, but I am alive - no longer I [ego] - but His Anointed alive within me. And at this present time, what I am living within flesh, I am living this within faith, the Son of God having loved me and having surrendered himself above and beyond me. 21 I am absolutely not setting aside the free gift of God, because if judicial approval and right wise-ness [is] by means of law, then His Anointed died without cause’, (Galatians 2 v 20 – 21).

In verse 19 Paul made the general statement that –

‘I, [ego], by means of law, died to law, in order that I live to God’

Now Paul begins explain what he means and how this relates to the error of Peter, Barnabas and the other Christian Jews who were turning back to observing Sinai Covenant law. He says, ‘I have been crucified together with His Anointed, but I am alive’. In effect he begins to talk about his ‘old humanity’ and his ‘new humanity’ or new formation. He makes a similar statement in his letter to the Romans, ‘Knowing this, that our old human appearance is crucified together with [Jesus], in order that the body of self-forfeiture and loss is rendered down to being idle and inactive. We are no longer devotedly enslaved to the self-forfeiture and loss’, (Romans 6 v 6). In being brought forth by God, what he was, his natural, earthy fleshly constitution, has been crucified together with the Messiah. His old human appearance was tied and enslaved to energies, impulses and raw passions inherent within the fabric of his flesh. But when God brought him forth his old appearance changed. He died and yet he is alive. He has been brought forth as a new form, a ‘new self’. 

He says that he is no longer ‘I’ [ego]. What does he mean? ‘I’ is the locus of self-governance – ‘I’ choose, ‘I’ desire, ‘I’ think and feel. He means that he is no longer governing and regulating his speech and behaviour based on tied enslavement to the impulses and energies inherent within his fleshly constitution. Rather, by means of the Breath of God, the Messiah is alive within him and he has been set free from enslavement to self-forfeiture, in order to serve the Lord. The Lord is governing his speech and behaviour by means of the Breath within. Paul is no longer dead within fleshly unresponsiveness and insensitivity to God, but roused up from out of the dead towards responsiveness to God and Life in His Messiah by means of the Breath. 

Paul had not physically died, he was still living within his ‘vessel of clay’ or ‘earthly tent’. He was still existing within flesh, but now he was alive to God and living within entrustment and persuasion, a bond-slave of the Messiah, the anointed one of God ‘having loved me and having surrendered himself above and beyond me’. 

So how does this new ‘self’ relate to the behaviour of Peter and the other Hebrew Christians who were turning back to observing the written codes of Covenant law? Paul says, ‘I am absolutely not setting aside the free gift of God’. God brought Paul forth when he was in a helpless state. Paul did not have the ability to deliver himself from divine condemnation. His deliverance, his ‘bringing forth’ and ‘making alive’ is a free gift away from God, and away from His only-begotten Son ‘having loved me and having surrendered himself above and beyond me’ – above and beyond Paul’s ability. Paul says that he is not going to set aside this free gift. He is not going to dismiss it, which is what he would do of he went back to seeking to attain and maintain divine judicial approval by means of investing his labour and energy into observing the injunctions of the written codes of Covenant law.

The bottom line is this – ‘if judicial approval and right wise-ness [is] by means of law, then His Anointed died without cause’. 

If the means of attaining and maintaining divine approval is by means of observing Covenant law, by labouring to put into practice its written codes,

Then, if such a thing were possible, that is what God would have put in place.

But such a task is beyond the ability of anyone. More than this, if the means of deliverance and the maintenance of cleanliness was through obedience to the written codes of Covenant law, it would mean that the Messiah had died without purpose. His death would not have been necessary, it would have been superfluous, because this other method of deliverance and maintenance of cleanliness was already in place.

Galatians 2 v 17 – 19 - Jesus – Not a servant of self-forfeiture and loss

 ‘But if seeking judicial approval and being made rightwise within His Anointed, we ourselves have been found self-forfeiters, then is His Anointed a servant of self-forfeiture and loss? May it not come into being! 18 Because if I am once more constructing these what I have torn down and demolished, I am standing myself together with being contrary, 19 because I, [ego], by means of law, died to law, in order that I live to God’, (Galatians 2 v 17 - 19).

First, Paul anticipates a potential objection. Peter, Barnabas and other Jews in Galatia had sought judicial approval within the Messiah. But they were now in error, they were ‘not walking straight towards the truth of the gospel’, (verse 14). They were turning back to the written codes of Sinai Covenant law and insisting that male Gentile Christians also had to be circumcised in agreement with that law. The objection that Paul considers is this – If Christians are in error is the Messiah a servant of self-forfeiture? In not advocating circumcision, is the Messiah serving error? 

Paul replies, ‘May it never come to happen!’. So what is the situation with Peter, Barnabas and the Jewish Christians that have ‘shrunk back’? Paul answers by supposing a situation in which it is himself who is in error. He says ‘If I am once more constructing these that I have torn down and demolished…’. In heralding the gospel, Paul has torn down and demolished requirements that exist under the written codes of the Sinai Covenant. This is something that Christian legalists also struggle with. But it is clear that Paul is not demanding that male Gentile Christians had to be circumcised, and this is contrary to what is required under Sinai Covenant law. In the same way he was not insisting that Christians had to engage in making sacrifices, nor was he directing Christians to the Ten Commandments. So he says that if he now changes course and starts to once again insist on, and construct these practices – circumcision, sacrifices and directing to the written codes of Sinai Covenant law – things that he has previously torn down, then ‘I am standing myself together with being contrary’. In other words, ‘If I do this then I am being inconsistent and I am contradicting myself’. 

But if he insists on reinstating these practices that he has previously torn down, this is more than a simple ‘change of policy’ or a ‘U turn’. It contradicts Paul’s position as a Christian. Why? ‘Because I, [ego], by means of law, died to law, in order that I live to God’. This is consistent with what Paul says in Romans 7 v 4, where he says that the Christian’s ‘old self’ is put to death by the law that reveals his self-forfeiture and loss. Christians are placed in union with the Messiah by means of the Breath, and this means that they are crucified with him, but the law is brought to completion by means of the body of the Messiah as the Lamb of God without stain or blemish. The law, by means of the body of the Messiah, is brought to completion, penetrating into those who are placed in union with him becoming free, away from the law, to stand within divine judicial approval within the Messiah. They are roused up to Life with him by means of the Breath. Because they died within the Messiah, the written codes of Covenant law are rendered idle, and they are roused up from the dead as a ‘new self’.

Galatians 2 v 14 – 16 - The Christian challenge to legalists

 ‘But when I saw them not walking straight towards the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of all, ‘If you, being a Jew first of all, are living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, why are you compelling the Gentiles to live like a Jew? 15 We [are] natural born Jews, and absolutely not from out of ethnic [Gentile] self-forfeiture and no share, 16 but we know that a man is absolutely not judicially approved or made rightwise from out of actions of law, if not by means of persuasion and entrusting Jesus His Anointed. We penetrate towards being faithfully persuaded of Jesus, His Anointed, to the point of obedience, in order that we are judicially approved and made rightwise from out of faith in His Anointed, not by means of law actions, because all flesh will not be judicially approved or made rightwise by means of law works’, (Galatians 2 v 14 – 16). 

Paul was not one to mince his words. He confronted Peter in front of everyone when he saw him acting contrary to the gospel, ‘not walking straight towards the truth of the gospel’. In what way was Peter in error? He was separating himself away from Christians who were Gentiles. But more than this, it would seem that Peter was aligning himself with the assertive, legalistic Jews who had recently arrived, and he was now compelling male Gentile Christians to be circumcised according to divine law. First of all, Paul exposes Peter’s inconsistency. He says, ‘You are first of all a Jew, and under the equality of the gospel you are living like a Gentile and not like a Jew. So why are you now compelling Gentiles to live like a Jew?’ Peter’s approach was a contradiction.

Then Paul, who was himself a Jew, reminds Peter of their heritage and their new position within the Messiah. Unlike Jewish proselytes, Paul and Peter are natural born Jews. They are not from out of the self-forfeiture of Gentiles. Paul and Peter both knew that if an individual is not judicially approved by means of persuasion and entrusting Jesus - God’s Anointed - then they are absolutely not judicially approved from out of his or her labours and efforts to observe the written codes of divine law, such as the requirement to be circumcised.  

Hebrew Christians, like Gentile Christians, penetrate towards being persuaded of Jesus, God’s Anointed, to the point of obedience. This means that Jews, like Gentiles, are judicially approved and made rightwise from out of faith – entrustment to the point of obedience - in His Anointed. Hebrew Christians are not judicially approved or made rightwise by means of law actions, says Paul, because all flesh will not be judicially approved or made rightwise by means of energy and work invested in trying to observe the requirements of the written codes of divine law. Even though Jews possess divine law and have this advantage over Gentiles, God will not judicially approve or make rightwise even one natural born Jewish individual as a result of them labouring and expending their energy in trying to observe the injunctions of divine law. 

Galatians 2 v 12, 13 - Christians and Jewish legalists – The problem stated

 ‘Before some came away from James, he [Peter] was eating with Gentiles. But when they came he shrunk back and separated himself, fearful of those from out of circumcision, 13 and the remainder of Jews also played the part with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away together with their acting the part’, (Galatians 2 v 12, 13). 

Paul states that because of the free gift of the Messiah, when it comes to Christians there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles. Previously, Jews, as God’s chosen ethnic group, separated themselves away from other nations, races and tribes – referred to in Scripture as ‘Gentiles’ or ‘Greeks’. Jews did not eat with Gentiles. But Peter, as a Christian Jew, had embraced what was for him this new equality and so he ate with Gentile Christians. 

But in Antioch, some Jews came away from James, though they were not necessarily authorised by him, (Acts 15 v 24), and they were emphatic in re-emphasising traditional Jewish practices, including Jews not eating with ‘unclean’ Gentile ‘outsiders’. They also emphasised the requirement of Covenant law, that males who were seeking to serve God were to be circumcised. This was originally an instruction to Abraham, patriarch of the Jews, and later this instruction was enshrined in the written codes of divine law. It was the first injunction for Jews and it was also a requirement for Gentile males who sought to embrace the worship and service of YHVH by becoming Jewish proselytes.

So when these rather assertive Jews appeared on the scene, Peter became fearful of them, and he shrunk back and separated himself from eating with Gentiles, contrary to the gospel. Then other Jewish or Hebrew Christians also began to behave in the same way, carried away by this fear and by what their fellow Jews were doing. Even Barnabas was caught up in this. But Paul was not happy with this situation at all.

Covenant law, flesh, set-apart Breath and the promise of God

 I want to continue the discussion about Christians and their relationship to divine law by looking at Paul’s letter to the Galatians. I am concerned to explore the theme of legalism and the Christian’s relationship to Covenant law because a few decades ago I spent some years within a legalistic Christian fellowship. I know from first hand experience how depressing, discouraging and disheartening a legalistic fellowship can be, and how it can lead a Christian to be imprisoned. The legalist’s constant reference to Christians consistently failing to keep the principles and injunctions of what they define as God’s (moral) law can serve to promote an orientation of failure, helplessness and entrapment. Under such teaching, Christians may develop a sense of impotence when serving God moment-by-moment, a sense that they are powerless victims at the mercy of their ungodly fleshly impulses and desires, constantly falling short of what God approves of, and thus incurring God’s displeasure. Such legalistic teaching can lead to a joyless fellowship that can in turn lead to its members criticising and judging one another.

Christian legalists may not completely disagree with this since they propose that the intention of Covenant law is to drive both unbelievers and Christians to entrust the Messiah. This principle is indeed true for ‘outsiders’ or unbelievers’, especially those who are seeking divine approval by their own efforts to keep God’s law. But for those having embraced the Messiah by faith, turning back to efforts to observe divine (moral) law as a means to live a set-apart life is portrayed by both Paul and the writer of the letter to the Hebrews, as a backward step. If pursued enough it risks denying or negating the Messiah. Emphasis on, and regular reference to, divine law leads even Christians to a sense of their pervasive guilt and failure. But legalists propose that this then ‘drives’ Christians (and unbelievers) to the Messiah. That is their ‘dynamic process’ when it comes to living a godly life, but it is not what is presented to Christians by the Apostles.   

Even so, legalism can be very difficult to argue against because its Christian advocates make many appeals and references to Scripture. After all, Covenant law itself is part of Old Testament Scripture. So legalists may imply, or even openly and directly state, that to criticise legalism is to criticise the Word of God itself. Criticism of the legalist dynamic is portrayed as another example of failure. Such critics may have their loyalty to God or even their salvation, questioned. I know. I’ve seen it happen and experienced it myself. And of course, legalists almost always also accuse or warn their critics of supporting liberalism or permissiveness. Thus it is that Christians may be ensnared by these kinds of tactics.

If Paul’s letter to the Romans looks at divine law, flesh and the set-apart Breath, then his letter to the Galatians looks at divine law, flesh and the promise of God to Abraham and his seed. I want to get straight to heart of the theme – namely the arrival of Jewish legalists who insisted that male Gentile Christians should be circumcised according to Covenant law. So I am not going to comment on the early section of Galatians. 

By way of introduction I will give an exceptionally brief overview here of the early part of Galatians. Paul states that there is only one gospel, one good news message. But then he says, ‘I marvel that you are transferring in this manner quickly away from your calling within the Messiah’s free gift into another good message – which is not another…there are some troubling you, desiring to turn and change the good news of the Messiah’, (Galatians 1 v 6, 7). Paul then explains his background and defends his delegated authority as an Apostle, stating that he had received approval from the other Apostles. In other words he is not some eccentric rogue itinerant preacher making up his own good news. It is in chapter 2 v 12 that Paul states the nature of his concern.

New resource - Section-by-section Commentary on the Book of Revelation

 

A complete Commentary on the Book of Revelation is now available HERE. The site offers a section-by-section exploration and Commentary on the Book of Revelation, completely free. It offers an important and relevant resource for personal study or study groups at this present time. 

New series coming soon

 New series on Paul's letter to the Galatians coming soon.

'God's promise in relation to Covenant Law'

Also coming soon, a link to a new website that will have a complete commentary on the Book of Revelation

Principles of living a godly life [77] – More than conquerors

 ‘Who will accuse down the select of God, God the judicially approving and making rightwise? 34 Who is judging against and passing sentence? Jesus the Messiah, the having died, or rather now who having been roused up, is also at the right hand of God, and who is interceding above us. 35 What will put separating space away from the practical benevolent love of the Messiah? Pressure, confinement, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 Because as it has been written, ‘On account of you we are facing death all the day, we are counted as sheep of sacrifice’. 37 But within all this we are more than conquerors by means of Him starting and continuing to love us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angel/messengers, nor beginnings, nor things at hand, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor profound depth, nor any other original formation will have the power to put separating space away from the love of God within Jesus the Messiah, our Lord’, (Romans 8 v 33 – 39). 

And so we come to the glorious end of chapter 8. The deliverance of Christians is secure and certain away from the free gift of God by means of Jesus the Messiah. So who is going to accuse the select of God? It is God Who is making them judicially approved and rightwise. Who is judging and passing sentence? Jesus the Messiah! Jesus has successfully secured redemption for those whom God has brought forth. Having died, he is now roused up with God’s approval, and interceding as High Priest above us. Who then is going put distance and separation between Christians and the practical, beneficial love of the Messiah? 

Christians at different times and in different places experience extreme hardship, confinement or persecution. Some face very adverse situations. Paul quotes from Psalm 44 v 22, as descriptive of what God’s faithful people may expect from their enemies at any period when the unbeliever’s hatred of God and righteousness is roused and there is nothing to restrain it. The argument seems to be this: God’s faithful people of old have endured all manner of suffering, and yet they were not separated from the love of God, therefore such sufferings cannot separate them now. Outsiders or unbelievers reckon that they have Christians at their command, such that they can cut Christians off, negate them or cancel them when they choose. At the height of their opposition they place little importance on the suppression of the gospel or even the destruction of Christians, if such actions serve their own purpose. 

‘But…’. Paul acknowledges the potential of such opposition. He does not present a glib, sentimental or romanticised view in which Christians are always happy and live a peaceful, safe existence. Nevertheless, he says that ‘within all this we are more than conquerors by means of Him starting and continuing to love us’. Not even the Christian’s physical death will separate them away from the love of God. And thus he plainly and simply lists (verses 38, 39) those opposing circumstances that may seem to have the potential to separate Christians away from the love of God, but which in reality do not have the power to do so. No ‘original formation will have the power to put separating space away from the love of God within Jesus the Messiah, our Lord’, (verse 39). 

Having stated his teaching about divine approval and having considered some potential objections to it, Paul then goes on in chapter 9 to look at the specific situation of Jews as God’s chosen ethnic group, in the light of most of them rejecting Jesus as being their Messiah. But I am going to pause my series on godliness and the relationship of Christians to divine law at the end of chapter 8 for a short while, for a brief summer break. Then I will resume looking at Christians and divine law by moving on to look at Paul’s letter to the Galatians.