|
Word Gems
exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Galatians
Chapter 3
return to the main-page article on Galatians
[Prefatory note: The Authorized (King James) Version, unless otherwise indicated, is employed herein, featured, most notably, in bold type as plenary verses and, at times, as key words and phrases.]
A Survey and Critical Analysis of Galatians 3
The apostle Paul begins chapter three with a gentle scolding of his converts: “You dear idiots of Galatia, my friends, you really need to have your heads examined. Why do you insist on staying in kindergarten, thinking immaturely, even though you’ve come of age? Don't you know who you really are or understand the freedom you've been given?”
Not every liberator is lauded as hero. And why? Some prefer the security of prison or the nursery. The great apostle, often playing the role of comforter to the afflicted, is about to afflict the comfortable – the satisfied ones, those fancying themselves able to secure life by private effort alone.
3. 1. O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
O foolish Galatians. “dear idiots of Galatia” (Phillips 393); “unthinking” Galatians (Stamm 496).
foolish. Paul does not accuse his flock of desperate wickedness; he does, however, suggest that they have not been “using their heads” (Wuest 84), have failed “to put two and two together" (Stamm 496). Alan Cole reminds us that while “it is true that spiritual things are spiritually discerned, it is equally true [. . .] that theology is nothing more than the ordinary rules of grammar and logic applied to the text of Scripture" (Cole 87). But Paul, the correcting teacher, seems to have more on his mind than mere mistake. He has already called the Galatians "turncoats" (1. 6), and here he begins to speak to the cause of that transference of allegiance.
bewitched. The Greek suggests “the art of a sorcerer,” that of casting a “spell” (Vaughan 58), "blinded by malicious magic" (Mikolaski 1097). Paul engages in metaphor; he is not suggesting any literal use of the black arts. He means to say, “You have been duped, hoodwinked.”
evidently set forth. The Greek speaks literally of that which is “placarded”; anciently, a form of communication used; for example, by officials to proclaim public news such as “the fact that an execution had been carried out” (Vine 70), or an announcement by “a father [who] would no longer be responsible for his son's debts" (Wuest 84).
Jesus Christ [. . .] crucified among you. "The word estauromenos, ‘crucified,’ is interesting from its tense; it is the perfect passive participle which usually expresses a continuing result. So NEB translates 'upon his cross'; so we might render it 'Jesus, a crucified Messiah'" (Stott 70); so too, Wuest: "The word ‘crucified’ is in the perfect tense [. . .]. [The] apostle is not speaking of [. . .] a dead Christ on a crucifix, but of the risen [. . .] Christ who had been crucified" (84).
obey the truth. Some will say that imperatives toward obedience fall strangely from the lips of this apostle. What are we to make of this admonishment to “obey the truth” from one who just spent a great deal of energy (in chapter two) minimizing the law?
To understand Paul’s reasoning in these opening verses, one must not lose sight of his final thoughts in chapter two – there is, of course, no chapter-break in the original. Paul has already registered his objections to any attempted diminution of Christ’s work; to say that man can save himself through the “works of the law” is to state, by implication, that Christ needn’t have bothered to die. Paul’s discourse at Antioch, one that began by addressing Peter specifically, but, by exposition’s end, became a general appeal to everyone, leaned heavily on the truth that mankind can be saved only by “faith”; that is, by taking to ourselves Jesus in terms of the most intimate of relationships; by asking him to heal us from the inside out – something the law could never do.
All of this serves as backdrop to his present scolding. He now speaks to his “old parish” directly and asks them pointedly how they could have ever allowed themselves to lose sight of Christianity’s central fact - that only Jesus can save us: “O foolish Galatians!” Paul reminds them that we honor Jesus not fundamentally as “the great teacher,” or “the healer of disease,” or even as “the Jewish Messiah.” He wears, of course, all of those titles, but Paul is adamant that his flock recall his former instruction to view “Jesus as the ever-crucified Christ.” Paul means that Christ’s saving work speaks to humankind’s greatest need, its ever-present and continuing need, its constitutional and systemic inability, to transform itself into anything approaching true goodness.
When Paul employs the phrase “obey the truth,” he means to express, I think, the principle that our thoughts and actions must reflect the reality of “Jesus, the ever-crucified Christ.” By their actions, the Galatians were in process of denying the work of Jesus, the one in whom resides “the truth” (Eph. 4. 21). The Galatians were "foolish" in that they had mentally shelved and had distracted themselves from the cosmic implications of Jesus' work. Paul had assiduously “placarded” before them this essential point, but they had thrown it all into the dustbin of what they began to view as impracticable theology.
3. 2. This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
This only would I learn of you. “I simply want to ask you one thing” (The New Testament, A New Translation 848). Paul, with this rhetorical question, means to expose the senselessness of the Galatians’ actions. He sets before them, in principle, the two broad ways by which humankind attempts to approach God: “the law-way” or “the faith-way” – doing versus believing.
received. Paul asks his converts to think back: “On what basis did you come to God? How did you begin?” Without waiting for the obvious answer, he hits them with another question.
3. 3-5. Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Spirit [. . .] flesh. Paul, here, likely touches upon a primary argument of the Judaizers. They seem to have agreed that Jesus is Messiah, but not the “ever-crucified Messiah;” for them, Jesus plays the role of mere figurehead in the church, a kind of public relations officer whose job it is to attract new membership by his celebrity. The truly important and productive activity, however, takes place only in the workshop of “the law.” Jesus, they said, with his good-will gestures, may have initially brought us to God, but now we must work hard to maintain our justified status.
Paul, of course, thinks all of this to be rubbish: “Are you so foolish,” he chides! “On what basis do you fancy yourselves able to finish that which you could never hope to initiate?” Paul, like Socrates, has a way of cutting to the quick of things.
suffered. Many translations render this word, “experienced," a better choice because, as the Greek indicates, the “experience may be good or evil, according to the context. Paul had in mind the joys as well as the sufferings of the Christian life" (Stamm 499).
Paul seems to be saying this: “God loves each of you individually; and, in your daily walk with him, has given to each one his personal care. These experiences, daily insights and lessons, his daily gift of the Spirit to you, offering on-going evidence that God is with you, all were meant to solidify your relationship with him. But you’re now jettisoning that process of growth; in effect, you’re saying, ‘He doesn’t really love me and can’t be trusted to see me through life. I must now ensure my salvation by taking matters into my own hands.’ Is this the message you’ve read into your life experiences? Is this to be the final result of all that God has given you?”
Having appealed to their personal experiences with God, evidence enough, Paul insists, that they were now taking the wrong course, he adds to his argument the witness of Scripture, a reference to God’s dealings with father Abraham. We begin to sense, in greater detail, the Judaizers’ argument, and Paul now prepares to advance upon it. As we’ve seen, Paul’s enemies claim that he is “liberal;” that he does not respect the law of Moses; that he is loosening clear Scriptural commands: "Wasn't circumcision,” they claimed, “the token of Abraham’s covenant? And didn't God say that the world would be blessed through Abraham? This should be plain enough for anyone to see. We must all do what Abraham did - men must be circumcised."
But Paul now begins to do what he does best. His legal training provides for him a "sharp angle" on the scripture, a masterful expertise at word-by-word exegesis. He will now cast light upon what the scripture reports God actually saying to our first-father in the faith, Abraham. Paul will use the following passages to explain to the Galatians that the so-called "liberal" gospel of grace was preached by God long ago:
(1) Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Gen. 15. 6;
(2) In thee shall all nations be blessed. Gen. 12. 3; 18. 18; 22. 18;
(3) Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Deut. 27. 26;
(4) The just shall live by faith. Hab. 2. 4;
(5) The man that doeth them shall live by them. Lev. 18. 5;
(6) Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Deut. 21. 23; and
(7) And to thy seed. Gen. 12. 7; 13. 15; 24. 7.
3. 6, 7. Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
Abraham. Paul’s allusion to Abraham is a “master-stroke” (Stott 72). The Judaizers assumed that they had the weight of history on their side by appealing to the ancient law-giver, Moses; but Paul, the lawyer, now does them one better – he calls to the witness stand the highest authority among Israel’s teachers, the most venerable father Abraham, the first of the Hebrews.
believed. The terms “believe” and “faith” (verse 5), in the Greek, derive from the same family of words, the root sense suggesting, “the attitude whereby a man abandons all reliance in his own efforts to obtain salvation” (Morris 411). However, Paul is here quoting from Genesis 15. 6, “Abraham believed God.” There, the English word translated “believe” is a form of the Hebrew, “amen,” often passing into the English in this transliterated form. Its core meaning denotes “support“ or “firmness” and is often rendered “truth” in the Old Testament (Scott 51).
The implications of this proclaim, I think, something quite significant. Often, when the man-on-the-street employs the term “believe,” he means to express a tentative conclusion, even a frail hope, for the reality of some future event; for instance, in the statements, “I believe it will rain today” or “I believe I will go to the movies tonight,” we sense no firm commitment to the ideas expressed. However, when the scripture advises, even commands, “belief” or “faith” – especially for the Spirit-led believer – there is no hint of any such equivocation.
The Hebrew “amen” frequently comes to us in scripture as the correct human response to something God has purposed: God says that he will do something, and man’s proper response should be, “I agree. I am sure. I know this to be true. I may not know how you’re going to do what you say, but if you say so Lord, so be it - amen! It will happen.”
Notice the context of Genesis 15 from which Paul takes his passage, an insight expressed in the orations of peripatetic evangelist, Malcolm Smith: Abraham had been trying to “help” God provide a son for himself, an heir to fulfill God’s promises. First Abraham tried to make nephew Lot his son; then servant Eliezer; later, Ishmael. God in effect tells Abraham: I’m the one who made the promise, and it’s up to me to make it a reality. My promise is not supposed to become a challenge for you to make happen! A promise is the sole business of the one offering the gift. Your job, if it is a gift, is only to say thank-you.”
God goes on to explain that Abraham’s heir would follow from none of Abraham's choices but would issue as his own flesh-and-blood son. Though mindful of the fact that he was fast approaching age 100, he “believed God” (Gen. 15. 6); that is, he said amen to God. In other words, Abraham, aware of his own aging body, not to mention Sarah’s diminishing health, realized the utter physical impossibility of having a natural-born son. Nevertheless, in effect, he said to God: “I don’t see how you’re going to do this, but if you say so, I am sure; I believe; I say amen to you.” We begin to see why Abraham is called our father in the faith.
Christian faith, the kind Paul speaks of here, is not something we struggle to attain, is fundamentally not about trying very hard, not merely a gritting of the teeth and setting of the jaw -- a celebration of the human will. Faith is the absolute confidence that even the humanly impossible, like a hapless captive taken by a conquering warlord, must “bend the neck” before the God who promises; but then, having acknowledged this, faith becomes an abandonment of oneself to God and his particular, often mysterious, workings; a surrender, a relaxing and falling into the arms of the God who loves us. The prayer of faith ends with amen: “God, that mountain looks too high from where I stand. But if you say so Lord, then I say amen. I am sure.”
A final, general comment on this, but one that well might have had implications for the wayward Galatians: Christians often make the kind of mistake that Abraham made early in his walk with God. For example, we lose a job, but are confident that God will give us another by the end of the week; our loved-one becomes sick, and we are sure that God will heal the afflicted by morning, if not instantaneously; we are treated unfairly by others, and we believe that God will shortly vindicate us. God, at times, does act in an immediate way.
But any person of faith who’s walked with God more than a little way down life’s road, knows very well that God is not a genie-in-a-bottle, not a fairy god-mother, not Superman ever-catching Lois Lane falling out of tall buildings! God is not in the business of micro-managing our lives, immediately warding off with a wand the harmful effects of every bad decision we make, or even mitigating the ill-effects inflicted upon us by the sins of others. Unfortunately, for some, a relationship with God becomes the tawdry opportunity to tell him how we expect the universe to be run.
Reading between the lines (verse 4), we sense this to have been part of the problem of the Galatians. Presumably, their religious past taught them to purchase” divine blessing by offering deity a sacrifice – “put your nickel in and the candy bar comes out” – but their “experience” with Paul’s God of grace may have quickly turned to disillusionment when he failed to immediately perform as requested.
Abraham, finally, “found” (Rom. 4. 1), that is, he learned, that God has his own ways and his own time-table for bringing to pass his promises, a lesson that had escaped the Galatians. Fundamentally, our trust is not to be centered in God’s promises – but in God himself! My point will become clear to those who have ever entered into a business contract, a set of legal “promises,” only to find the contract rendered useless by the malfeasance of the grantor. In other words, a promise is only as good as the person standing behind it. Christians and all people of faith must remember this. We are right to claim God’s promises – but not as the legalists do who often speak of promises as “law,” as if promises had a life of their own or as if we could negotiate, via good works, our salvation directly with “the promises.”
“No,” says Paul, “the scripture says that ‘Abraham believed God’ – not the promises; he committed himself to the One behind the promises.” Paul knows -- something he yearns to impart to his flock -- that God can be trusted; that even when the physical evidence, the discomforting events of life, suggest that “the promises” are nothing more than a cosmic joke, whether in this life or the next, all things will eventually be ours, all suffering will be at an end, all wrongs will be righted, all of our deepest desires will be satisfied.
accounted. A “commercial term” borrowed from the world of accounting (Ridderbos 118); “to charge something to one’s account” (Vaughan 62). Right-standing before God was, metaphorically speaking, entered as an asset on Abraham’s balance sheet on the basis of – not his works, not circumcision – but his faith.
righteousness. Achtemeier asserts that this term’s essential meaning, derived not from etymology but exhaustive study of its Old Testament usages, is that of “the fulfilment of the demands of a relationship”; that is, one “who is righteous has fulfilled the demands laid upon him by the relationship in which he stands” (80). This word implies an agreement, in the context under review, a covenant. God afforded to Abraham right-standing – righteousness – when he decided to “believe,” to commit himself fully to God. Faith, Abraham's part of the bargain, is what God requires as reasonable response.
3. 7-9. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham: Abraham’s “children” will be those who mirror their father's “faith.” Paul's point for the Judaizers, one sure to enrage them, is that the physical descendants of Abraham are not his primary sons. We can easily imagine the Judaizers saying: "To be a son of Abraham you must be circumcised as he was."
the scripture [. . .] preached before the gospel unto Abraham. "proeuengelisato, 'preached the gospel beforehand'” (Cole 93). Far from mandating circumcision, the story of Abraham, Paul maintains, anticipates the very gospel of grace that he now preaches.
In thee shall all nations be blessed. The Judaizers assumed that this verse from Genesis required followers of Abraham to be circumcised if they desired to be “blessed.” Paul, the lawyer, turns the tables on his opponents and asserts that this verse, one of the most famous scriptures of the Old Testament, has little to do with provincial notions of refashioning the world in the image of the Jews, especially relative to circumcision. In fact, this little Genesis phrase indicates that God will expand his plan to show mercy to the entire world, not just Israel! The logical conclusion here – for those among “the nations” who exercise faith – is that Abraham, the famous father of the Jews, will become the father of the Gentiles, too! Paul will raise eyebrows not a little with this claim! But don't box with Paul. He may have gone so far as to assert that Abraham had been a kind of Gentile when God pronounced him righteous! There were no Jews nor nation of Israel at that time! Abraham had no special standing with God – he was just another pagan in the world when God called him!
justify [. . .] blessed. Notice how these two words stand in apposition to each other. Paul says that God's promise to bless the world was a promise to justify them; to pronounce them "not guilty". However, justification was not to be the end of the acquittal process. In verse 14 we learn that justification leads us to the promise of the Spirit, which is the true blessing. Paul is saying that his gospel of grace is a major part of the long-promised “blessing” of Abraham.
3. 10-14. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live by them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
It is good to remind ourselves that, especially in the section under review, Paul is meeting his adversaries on their own turf; he is, as politicians use the term, “triangulating,” stealing the thunder and agenda of his critics by using their very own concepts, even their own words and favorite verses, against them. This is Paul, the lawyer, at his best. The Judaizers, as Paul beats them to an exegetical pulp, are not dealing with simple hill-folk now, the unsophisticated and easily manipulated “swing voters” of the early church.
Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Like attacking another with his own weapon, Paul takes this verse from Deut. 27. 26 and makes it say something the Judaizers don’t want to hear. Paul’s message is along these lines: “You want to talk about ‘The Book’ and ‘The Law’? Okay, listen to what The Book says to every person who would use ‘the works of the law’ as a means to salvation. It warns that if even one little sin is committed, even if one little slip is made in your entire life – if you don’t keep the law perfectly, you’re under the curse.”
The man that doeth them shall live by them. “Yes,” says Paul quoting Lev. 18. 5, “theoretically, it is possible to ‘live,’ that is, to find salvation, by keeping the law – the only little problem here is that no one has ever perfectly kept the law. Therefore, every person lives under ‘the curse’ because he has ‘continued not in all things’ written in The Book.”
The just shall live by faith. “Don’t you see,” exclaims Paul, “that scripture engages in a kind of dialectic, debating with itself about two broad ways of attaining salvation? Look at what it says in Habakkuk: ‘The just shall live by faith.’ This small phrase of long ago anticipated the 'grace way' to salvation and presaged the end of the 'law way' spoken of in Deuteronomy!”
no man is justified by the law in the sight of God. Paul continues his theme by explaining that 'the scripture itself – that verse in Habakkuk – by speaking of another way to approach God, the grace way, is implying that the law way can never save us! Got it?”
And the law is not of faith. “the two [systems] of law and faith are mutually exclusive of one another [. . .] opposed to each other" (Wuest 96).
Christ [. . .] made a curse for us. "the language here is startling [. . .]. We should not have dared to use it. Yet Paul means every word of it" (Stott 80). These words indicate just how closely Christ identifies and involves himself with the sordid task of redeeming a corrupted mankind.
Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Paul solemnly expostulates that Jesus’ death on the Cross fulfilled the dictum of Deut. 21. 23; Jesus, “hanged on a tree,” became a neon sign to all Israel that he suffered under God’s curse! "No wonder the Jews at first could not believe that Jesus was the Christ. How could Christ, the anointed of God, instead of reigning on a throne, hang on a tree? It was incredible to them” (Stott 81); The quotation from Deuteronomy means "not [. . .] that a man is cursed by God because he is hanged, but that death by hanging was the outward sign in Israel of a man who was thus cursed. He was, in fact, hanged because he had broken the law, and this brought both curse and punishment" (Cole 99). Paul uses this discussion to underline in red, for his readers, the serious business of minimizing the importance of Christ’s saving work.
3. 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Paul concludes this particular strand of reasoning with a summary statement, emphasizing that the gospel is none other than the ancient “blessing” of Abraham; that it is available to “the Gentiles,” not just to the Jews; that it may be received through faith in Christ; that the “blessing” is also the “promise” from God, even the “promise of the Spirit.”
3. 15. Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
I speak after the manner of men. “let me take an argument from common life” (The New Testament in the Translation of Monsignor R. Knox 850).
covenant. "The illustration is taken from the realm of human promises, not a business contract but a will [. . .]. The Greek word in verses 15 and 17 (diatheke) is translated 'covenant' in the AV because it is used in the LXX for the covenants of God. But in classical Greek and the Papyri it was in common use for a will, and is so translated here by the RSV [. . .]. The point [. . .] is that the [. . .] promises which are expressed in a will are unalterable [. . .] [and] if a man's will cannot be set aside [. . .], much more are the promises of God immutable" (Stott 87, 88).
Is Paul speaking of a covenant or a will? It is clear that God made a covenant with Abraham, so why call it a will here? The best answer seems to be that the covenant made with Abraham is also like a will in that it contained promises to be fulfilled for future descendants.
confirmed. “validated” (The New English Bible 850). We have before us two parties, Paul and the Judaizers, each claiming to possess the valid will of the Testator, God. Seemingly, two wills were prepared - law and grace! Which one is valid? One of them purports to save men by works, the other, by God's gift. Each party seeks to have his will "ratified," that is, secure legal standing. Paul will assert in verse 19 that the law-system was a codicil, a mere "supplement or an addition to a will [which does not] contain the entire will of the testator, nor does it ordinarily expressly or by necessary implication revoke in toto a prior will” (Black 234). This codicil, Paul will shortly explain, "was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator" for a temporary period of time, for limited purposes, and does not revoke or supersede the original intent of the Testator, God.
3. 16. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. The original will "was made on the basis of faith and fellowship between God and Abraham, and was never recalled” (Stamm 512).
seeds [. . .] seed. Paul’s legal mind ventures to where no mind has gone before. Consider carefully this paraphrase of his reasoning: “The promises that God made to Abraham were to be consummated in and through a future Descendant -- that's descendant in the singular, not plural! As such, the promises of God were made to one Person only! And that Person, that single Descendant of Abraham, is Jesus Christ! My dear foolish Galatians, do you begin to understand what this means? It means that you have no access to any of the promises of God -- no salvation -- unless you are linked to Christ! This may not be plain enough for some of you who've been seduced by the Pharisees' distortions, so allow me to go further. No amount of personal law-keeping, or commandment-keeping, or ritual observance, or hard work, sweat, tears, blood, or any other effort on your part can act as currency to buy salvation from God. I will up the ante still further and say that God's offer of salvation to mankind is not, in one sense, an individual offer to each human being. I will say it again, the promises of God were made to one Person, and unless you ally yourself with that one Person to whom the promises were made, you will find yourself without an offer to accept!"
3. 17. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
And this I say. “This is my main point …”
the law [. . .] cannot disannul [. . .] the promise. Paul, continuing, seems to be saying this: “The covenant which God made with Abraham, which is like a will in that it contained the promises of God to future generations, cannot be set aside by the temporary law-system instituted at Sinai 430 years later.”
law [. . .] promise. John Stott masterfully expresses the difference between these two:
“In the promise to Abraham, God said, 'I will do this ... I will do this ... I will ...'. But in the law of Moses, God said 'Thou shalt ... thou shalt not'. The promise sets forth a religion of God -- God's plan, God's grace, God's initiative. But the law sets forth a religion of man -- man's duty, man's works, man's responsibility. The promise (the actions of God) had only to be believed. But the law (the works of men) had to be obeyed. God's dealings with Abraham were in the category of 'promise,' 'grace,' and 'faith.' But God's dealings with Moses were in the category of 'law,' 'commandments,' and 'works'." (86, 87)
3. 18. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Paul is adamant for us to understand that “the inheritance,” that is, a gift promised to heirs in a will, is either, fundamentally, a matter of law or of grace – but not both. "The conclusion to which Paul is leading is that the Christian religion is the religion of Abraham not Moses (Stott 87).
3. 19, 20. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
Because Paul’s adversaries incessantly emphasized “the law,” he was often forced to take the other side. As such, Paul easily earned the reputation of anarchist, one who was against law and order, and even the purposes of God. Paul now attempts to mitigate some of that bad press by explaining the function of the law.
added. In verse 15 Paul said that promises laid out in a man's will cannot be modified or added to. However, in verse 19, we find that the law-system was added to the grace-system, which, as we've seen, was God's original and preferred method of dealing with mankind. The apparent contradiction resolves itself: Paul uses two different Greek words for added in verses 15 and 19. The adding of verse 19 did not result in a “joining” - to employ a metaphor borrowed from chemistry - that created a new compound, that is, an entirely new system by which men might be saved. The word added here means, literally, "to place [. . .] toward,” that is, “brought in alongside” as a supplement to the grace-system and subordinate to it. (Wuest 105).
because of. Paul seems to be preaching in a kind of shorthand, words probably understood by his readers but not as clear for us: "Neither because of nor for the sake of can quite convey the meaning of the [Greek] preposition in this passage [. . .]. [The law and man’s inability to keep it was meant] to convince men that they were so bad that nothing could save them except God's mercy through Christ” (Stamm 514); “The law [. . .] was not given because of the existence of transgressions, but to show sin in its true light” (Wuest 105); "It was an addition made to underline the existence and extent of sin" (Phillips 394).
Paul seems to be saying this: "With the coming of Sinai’s law-system, men not only had their consciences telling them that they had violated a general moral code (Rom. 2:14), but now they also had God’s direct word telling them they had ‘sinned.’ The law-system revealed to men in a much more vivid way just how much they really hate taking orders from God." Compare this to the apostle’s teaching in Romans 7. 13: “"Did that which is good, then become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful” (The Holy Bible, New International Version). The prime function of “the law,” we are coming to see, is not to bestow salvation on men but to convince them of their need of it!
till. The law-system was meant to be temporary.
the seed. Israel was to be under the law-system until the coming of Christ, “the Descendant” by whom men could find healing. While he did foresee its necessity, the Father did not relish instituting the law-system. From the beginning it was God's desire to deal with mankind in terms of grace; but, because of human frailty, he temporarily authorized the “law way.”
ordained by angels. "The presence of the angels, said the rabbis, was the measure of the law's great glory” (Stamm 515). These august, suprahuman creatures, merely by their presence, it was thought, lent to the law a greater glory. Paul takes a different view toward angels; in this context, not a complimentary one. Paul seems to be saying that the law is inferior to the promise in that the law was given not directly by God but by mediator-angels; the promise, on the other hand, was given to Abraham directly by God without the aid of middlemen!
mediator. “The word mediator is from mesites, which in turn comes from mesos which means middle, the midst. Thus a mediator is one who intervenes between two, either to make or restore peace and friendship, to form a compact, or ratify a covenant” (Wuest 106). A mediator implies a bargaining process, in which each party, as virtual adversary to the other, attempts to extract some benefit. The "law-system" constituted such a process.
a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. “God is One, that is, He acts alone without a mediator in respect to the promise of grace” (Wuest 106). Verse 20 is paraphrased: “A mediator, by definition, cannot work for one party alone - there must be at least two. Since scripture tells us that ‘the law’ was given through a mediator, we infer from this that the mediator represented the interests of two parties, both involved in a kind of bargaining process. But the giving of ‘the promise’ was different - was not about bargaining but simply a no-strings-attached grace-gifting! God acted as one party; he acted alone; he acted unilaterally - no quid pro quo, no attempt to gain advantage from the receiving party.”
But even if we accept Paul’s contention that “the law” and “the promise” have different functions, do they not stand in opposition to each other?
3. 21. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
against. Paul vigorously asserts that law and promise are not in conflict with each other; they simply “operate in different spheres” (Wuest 107).
if there had been a law given which could have given life. Legalists are fond of saying, “Keep the law, and you will be blessed.” To young Christians, especially, this formulaic approach seems to be the elixir of life: “What could be simpler? All I have to do is obey this list of rules and success is mine.” Paul must inform his readers that such view of God and religion is quite hypothetical – there has never been a law that has been able to impart life. If this were a possibility, God may very well have granted “righteousness” on this basis.
3. 22. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
that. With this small word, in the middle of the verse, Paul harmonizes the two systems, “law” and “grace.” As mankind comes to perceive its own state of sin, a universal condition affirmed by scripture, it will, usually after its tried everything else, “believe” in Christ and accept the “promise.” There is great value for one to temporarily endure a legalistic system, used by God as a kind of aversion therapy, to bring mankind to itself. Paul can well speak from personal experience here.
3. 23. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Paul continues the thought of verse 22, explaining the nature of the law’s effect before one comes to “faith” in Christ.
kept under the law, shut up unto the faith. “Before the coming of faith, we were all imprisoned under the power of the Law” (Phillips 394); The "KJV is hopelessly obscure [. . .]. The meaning is 'being kept in restraint while awaiting the faith that was to be revealed’” (Stamm 517).
under the law. In an effort to rescue private agendas, legalists often construe this phrase to mean "under the death penalty imposed by the law" rather than “under the law-system.” To emphasize "penalty" instead of "system" begins to imply that "law" refers simply to "a list of rules."
This is not Paul’s point at all. Further, such construction implies that when any of these rules are broken we come under its penalty. This, of course, is part of the truth, but the muddying of the waters begins when we also imply that one’s perfect law-keeping will ward off a “penalty.” This, Paul says, is impossible in practice.
The issue is not simply, "woe to those who have broken any of the laws," but “woe to those who use the law as a system to earn salvation.” To ignore the system while emphasizing its penalty is to say that the system is fine if only we would be fine.
Modern-day Judaizers see the human condition in terms of sins committed as opposed to sin inherent within mankind. It implies that, with special effort, some of us could circumvent and render obsolete the work of Christ; naiveté at best, and blasphemy for those who deliberately misunderstand.
To anyone who persists in misconstruing this phrase, notice Paul’s own line of reasoning in the following verses. Those “under the law” are like prisoners waiting for release, or like little kids being supervised by a strict governess. Paul does not emphasize that they are “under a death penalty” awaiting execution, but only that they live in a temporary state of immaturity and, consequently, under restraint (as little children or prisoners), while on their way to something more.
3. 24. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
schoolmaster. The “paidagogos” was not a schoolmaster, tutor, or teacher "but an attendant, ‘custodian’ (RSV), usually a slave who had charge of a child from six to sixteen to discipline him and keep him straight” (Stamm 517); The “paidagogos was not the boy's teacher so much as his disciplinarian [. . .] often harsh to the point of cruelty, and is usually depicted in ancient drawings with a rod or cane in his hand. JBP thinks that the modern equivalent is a strict governess” (Stott 97); The “paidagogos existed for no other reason than to make his charge independent of his care [. . .] to make the good pleasant to the boy [. . .]. [By this Paul] affirmed that the law was an inadequate, unsatisfactory thing, doomed to come to an end” (Barclay 209).
3. 26. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
all. Jews and Gentiles.
children of God. We are no longer immature children, scampering under the feet of the "strict governess," the law-system; but, so to speak, mature children of God, brothers and sisters of Christ, that original Son of God.
3. 27-29. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
In the modern world, in the democracies of the West, we speak of human rights for all, irrespective of gender, class, or creed. In practice, because most humans are still led by a darkened heart, many times these platitudes are not put into practice. But the official sentiment from most quarters lauds egalitarianism.
This is a fairly recent development in society’s history. In Paul’s day, slaves were common and, according to Aristotle, were placed by nature into such role; women were treated as chattel, property, and, with many, considered to be subhuman; and certain races considered it their destiny to rule over and dominate all others.
And so, when we see Paul, here, speaking of equality for everyone, we might not appreciate just how much he was a man “born out of time.” This is not how people generally viewed things 2000 years ago; and, for thousands of years before that, it was the same or worse. We’d have to go, I think, way back to the early Genesis accounts -- some of which, also written “out of time” -- for something similar to Paul’s high-mindedness. There, we find that God, in terms of representing the divine cognitive structure, “made humankind ‘in the image’, male and female”; a perfect equality, each picturing particular facets of God's mind and character.
Now, some might charge, “But Paul denigrated women in his other letters.” I don’t think so. Later, there was much forgery of documents and “putting into the mouth of Paul” what he utterly despised - just "fake news". The same goes on today, a mischaracterization of Paul’s teachings. However, what we see here in Galatians, this earliest document of the New Testament, reflects Paul’s truest heart concerning matters of human dignity, innate worth, and celestial potential. All stand before God on an equal footing, without partiality concerning gender, social class, race, or any other contrivance employed to separate people.
|