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 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 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.

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.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [29] – Divine Law and Divine approval [1]

 Many of the Apostolic references to divine Law refer to divine approval, to being declared righteous or placed in a position of no condemnation from God. Many Protestant Christian commentators (though not all), agree that no one is declared righteous by means of them trying to obey or keep the written codes of divine Law. Paul states the position of Christians succinctly in his letter to the Christians in Galatia. ‘Therefore, as many as exist from out of works and actions of Law exist under a curse. Because it is written, ‘Cursed, everyone who is not remaining within everything written in the book of the Law, constructing them. 11 Because now it is clearly evident that no one is judicially approved in the presence of God within the sphere of divine Law, because ‘The judicially approved will live from out of faithful confident persuasion’. 12 But the Law is not from out of confident persuasion, on the contrary, the one constructing these things will live by them. 13 The Messiah buys us up completely from out of the curse of the Law, having become a curse on behalf of us, because it is written, ‘Everyone hanging on a tree is accursed’, 14 in order that Abraham’s blessing comes to the Gentiles within Jesus the Messiah, so that we receive the promise - the Breath [pneuma] - through entrusting to the point of obedience’, (Galatians 3 v 10 – 14a).

Covenant Law says, ‘Do this and you will live’. That is the arrangement for those under the Sinai Covenant - ‘we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those within the Law’, (Romans 3 v 19), to Jews. ‘The hearers of the Law are not judicially approved alongside God, but the doers of Law will be declared judicially approved’, (Romans 2 v 13). But no one successfully obeys or keeps all of the Law. Rather, ‘The judicially approved will live from out of faithful confident persuasion’,  (verse 11 above). 

Paul contrasts doing the written codes of the Law with ‘faith’ and the Breath. These are two different means of obtaining divine approval. But he says that no one successfully enacts the written codes of divine law, so that instead, divine approval comes from faith, from entrustment to the point of obedience. In these last days, the Messiah and his atoning death at Calvary has been revealed and it is Jesus who is the focus of this faith or persuasion. The fruit and evidence of this entrustment is that it is carried across from within – from ‘inside the cup’ into godly speech and behaviour as Christians co-work with the Breath of God. 

This is the situation according to Paul - ‘Therefore, in front of Him all flesh will absolutely not be judicially approved from out of energy and work of Law, because by means of Law is full knowledge of self forfeiture and no share or portion. 21 But now apart and separate from Law, God’s judicial approval is being made clear and apparent, testified and borne witness to by the Law and the Prophets - 22 judicial approval by means of entrustment, penetrating toward all those entrusting Jesus the Messiah’, (Romans 3 v 20 – 22b). Paul states a conclusion on this matter a little later. ‘Because if those from out of Law are allotted heirs, [then] persuasion to the point of obedience is made void, is nullified, and the announced promise rendered entirely idle. 15 Because Law is working down settled anger’, (Romans 4 v 14, 15a). These two means of judicial approval are in many ways mutually exclusive. When it comes to divine law, the written codes are bringing down settled anger, whereas the arrangement of judicial approval by means of faith exists beside Covenant Law, in the sense that it does not abolish or dissolve divine Law, but brings it to completion and with it, divine judicial approval.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [25] – Divine Law, Priesthood, Citizenship and the Millennium Reign [1]

 In the previous posts we have seen that when God brings Christians forth they are placed as adopted sons within God’s household and within the royal priesthood that corresponds to that of Melchizedek, with Jesus as their high priest. Gentiles are brought in from existing in relative ignorance under a Covenant of Behaviour, and Jews are transferred from being under the Levitical order and the Sinai Covenant. This royal priesthood exists alongside Sinai Covenant Law but it does not abolish or dissolve Covenant Law. So where do Christians stand in relation to Covenant Law?

The coming Millennium Reign offers further insights on this theme. The questions are these - What will happen to God’s chosen ethnic group, Jews, in the Millennium Reign? What about the promises made to the descendants of Abraham with regard to possessing an area of Promised Land and so on? What about the ‘silver linings’ found throughout the Hebrew prophets concerning the restoration and reconciliation of Jews? What priesthood will Jews be placed under then?

Returning to the letter to the Hebrews, the author looks forward to the restoration of Israel and says, ‘Look! The days are coming, says the Lord. I will fully accomplish and complete on the basis of the household of Israel, on the basis of the household of Judah. 9 A fresh, new Covenant, not down from the Covenant that I made with their ancestors within the day I took hold of them by the hand to lead them from out of the land of Egypt, because they did not persevere and remain within my Covenant and I am disregarding them, declares the Lord’, (Hebrews 8 v 8, 9).

At the end of verse 9 the current position of Jews – the household of Israel – is stated clearly. God says, ‘because they did not persevere and remain within my Covenant I am disregarding them’. God still continues to withdraw Himself away from Jews at this present time. Does this mean that God has abandoned His promises to, and agreement with, the household of Israel via the patriarchs such as Abraham and Moses? Have these promises failed? Not at all. In the future God ‘will fully accomplish and complete a fresh new Covenant on the basis of the household of Israel, on the basis of the household of Judah’. God has made an agreement and promises with His chosen ethnic group, the household of Israel. On the basis that they are His chosen ethnic group out of all the nations, God will bring matters to a full and complete conclusion. But this will not happen on the basis of the Sinai Covenant and its written codes that was established after God led them out of slavery in Egypt. Why? ‘Because they did not persevere and remain within my Covenant’. Because the leadership was corrupt and rebellious, and they and the people were wayward, playing the harlot with other, Gentile gods and idols. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [16] – Divine Law defined

 What is divine Law? In Scripture the word ‘Law’ has a number of meanings, the particular meaning intended often being determined by the context in which the word ‘law’ is found. ‘Law’ can refer to the first five books of the Old Testament – the Pentateuch. Or it may refer to the larger body of the Hebrew Scriptures that includes the writings of the Prophets. It may refer to the written codes given to the Israelites through Moses as part of the Sinai Covenant after YHVH had released the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. Or it may refer to a fundamental principle that leads to specific patterns or types of speech and behaviour. It is the last two meanings that we will be concerned with more often than not. 

YHVH made a Covenant with Abraham and his male descendants, declaring that they were to be His chosen people and that He would be their God. Abraham and his male descendants were to be circumcised as a sign of this Covenant. Failure to be circumcised meant that such an individual would be cut off from his people, (Genesis 17 v 10 – 14). Prior to the exodus of Abraham’s descendants from Egypt under Moses, there were no sets of written codes away from God. 

On delivering Abraham’s descendants, the Israelites from slavery in Egypt, YHVH set out how things were going to be for as His chosen ethnic group. They agreed to be placed under what is sometimes called the Sinai Covenant, as part of which various written divine Laws were established, including the Ten Commandments. The Israelites were expected to live their lives in obedience to these Laws, which were intended to act like a ‘schoolmaster’ to keep them in God’s favour until the appearance of their promised anointed deliverer, the Messiah. These written Laws were seen as fixed and immovable – some of them literally being written in stone. The earlier instruction to be circumcised was re-stated in the written codes in the book of Leviticus, (Leviticus 12 v 3).     

Thus it was to Jews, not to Gentiles - other ethnic groups - that the written codes of divine Law were given. Other ethnic groups were left to their own ways of thinking, reasoning and behaving. And of course many such groups became worshippers of idols and so on. After the coming of the Messiah, Paul declared, ‘ …we are men of like affections to you, announcing the gospel to you, to turn away from these worthless vanities towards the living God who constructed the sky, the land, the sea and all within them, Who in ages gone permitted all the tribes and races to travel their own ways’, (Acts 14 v 15, 16). And again, ‘…we ought not to hold to the principle of God being like gold, silver or a skilful stone sculpture and the deliberation of a human being. Indeed therefore, God overlooking times of ignorance now commands all human beings everywhere to think and perceive afterwards’, (Acts 17 v 29, 30). 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [11] – Repentance [9 of 12]

 With regard to the ill-treatment that Jesus received we read this. ‘It has been written in this manner: The Messiah experiences ill treatment and rouses from out of lifelessness the third day to herald a change of thinking and perception afterwards and the sending away of no share and self-forfeiture on the basis of his name towards all ethnic groups, beginning away from Jerusalem’, (Luke 24 v 46, 47). In previous posts we have seen that although this good news concerning Jesus and the sending away of no share is presented to all ethnic groups, the initial focus of the New Testament in the gospels and the early chapters of Acts is on God’s chosen ethnic group, the Jews. This good news was initially presented to Jews, because as God’s chosen ethnic group they had many advantages that prepared them for the Messiah, such as the Law and the Prophets. But because of their persistent disobedience, since the Babylonian Captivity Jews have been left to their own empty thinking as God had withdrawn Himself from them. As a result, the Jews rejected Jesus, seeing him as a false Messiah. Thus the message to Jews was that ‘The God of our fathers rouses Jesus, whom you lay violent hands upon to hang upon a tree. The right hand of God lifts him up and exalts him as chief leader and deliverer, to give Israel a change of thinking and perception afterwards and a sending away of no share and self-forfeiture’, (Acts 5 v 30, 31). Again we read, ‘Of this, away from the seed [of David], God, down from a promise, brings Israel Jesus the Deliverer, John heralding beforehand, in front of his coming, an immersion of a change of thinking and perception afterwards to all the people of Israel’, (Acts 13 v 23, 24). But many Jews rejected Jesus and presumed that they were within God’s favour simply because they were descended from Abraham. They refused to acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah, leading Paul to ask, ‘do you despise and scorn the wealth of His useful kindness, patience and tolerance, unaware that God’s useful kindness leads you towards a change of mind and perception afterwards?’, (Romans 2 v 4). 

In due course, other ethnic groups, referred to in Scripture as ‘Greeks’ or ‘Gentiles’, were seen to respond to the gospel and this was reported to the council of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. ‘Hearing these things they were tranquil and honoured God saying, ‘Therefore God gives a change of thinking and perception afterwards towards life even to other ethnic groups’, (Acts 11 v 18). Paul testified to the Ephesians saying among other things that he 'shrunk back under nothing that they carried together, except declaring to you and publicly teaching you also from house to house, giving solemn evidence, God penetrating a change of thinking and perception afterwards towards both Jewish and Greeks, and entrustment within our Lord Jesus’, (Acts 20 v 20, 21). And again, ‘…but first to those within Damascus and then all Jerusalem and the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles, I announced to think and perceive afterwards and return on the basis of God, accomplishing actions worthy of a change of mind and perception afterwards’, (Acts 26 v 20)

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [10] – Repentance [8 of 12]

 ‘Metánoia’ is the noun that corresponds to the verb ‘metanoeó’ that I mentioned in the previous post. ‘Metánoia’ refers to someone who has ‘a change of thought and perception afterwards’ – an ‘after-thought’. It occurs twenty-two times in the New Testament and it presents the same themes as the verb ‘metanoeó’.

In Matthew’s gospel, when John the Baptist rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to him for baptism, he criticised their presumptions. ‘Therefore construct fruit suitable to a change of thought and perception afterwards, and so do not think to say within yourselves, ‘We possess Father Abraham’, (Matthew 3 v 8, 9a). See also Luke 3 v 8. We see here the differentiation between the thought itself and the behaviour that follows. John describes the behaviour as the ‘fruit’ or produce of thought. Thought that exists within us is thoroughly carried across to the other side and manifest in our observable actions or behaviour. 

John the Baptist says, ‘Indeed, I immerse you within water penetrating towards a change of thought and perception…’ (Matthew 3 v 11). The ‘thinking and perceiving afterwards’ is the ‘seed’ of the ‘fruit’ of behaviour. Thus, ‘John came to be within the wilderness immersing and heralding immersion, a change of thought and perception afterwards penetrating towards a sending away of no share and self-forfeiture’, (Mark 1 v 4). See also Luke 3 v 3. Paul also testifies to this process, ‘Then Paul said, ‘John baptised an immersion into a change of thinking and perception afterwards, telling the people penetrating towards the coming after him in order that they entrust, they exist, within Jesus’, (Acts 19 v 4). The ‘thought afterwards’ penetrates into a change of behaviour and entrustment in the Messiah to the point of obedience.

This thinking and perceiving after hearing the gospel is necessary because of our natural ignorance and the mistaken patterns of thought that arise from the energies within our fleshly constitution. These fleshly patterns of thought lead towards insensitivity and unresponsiveness to God, and leads some to conclude that God approves of them. But Jesus said, ‘I have not come to summon judicially approved by God, on the contrary, those falling short and widely missing the mark, penetrating towards a change of thought and perception afterwards’, (Luke 5 v 32).