Main Idea and Outline
The
Bible passage to exegete is Galatians 4:21-31. The main idea of the passage is
that the Galatians (and Christians) are no longer under the bondage
of the Law but under the grace of God. The passage is outlined as follows:
1)
The Galatians’ mindset and an
allusion to Abraham’s two wives (4:21-23)
A. The Galatians want to be under the Law (4:21)
B. Abraham’s two sons – one born of the slave woman in a natural way, and the other,
of the free woman as a result of a promise (4:22-23)
2. The allegorical interpretation of Hagar and Sarah (4:24-27)
A.
Hagar, representing the Law, originated at Mount Sinai, brought forth a slave.
(4:24)
B. Hagar represents the Jerusalem at Paul’s time, enslaved to Rome and the Law,
while Sarah represents the Jerusalem above, and the mother of grace. (4:25-26)
C. The quotation of Isaiah
applied to Sarah, who was barren but later blessed with a child, and would
enjoy a greater progeny than Hagar. (4:27)
3. The application of the
allegorical interpretation (4:28-31)
A. The Galatians, children of
promise, are persecuted by the Jews in bondage of the Law, as Isaac was persecuted
by the child born of the slave woman. (4:28-29)
C. Paul reminds the Galatians of the expulsion of Hagar and her son and
reiterates that they are children of the free woman. (4:30-31)
Introduction
Galatians is Paul’s most combative and passionate defense of his theology.
Here in the passage, Paul uses an allegorical interpretation to demonstrate
that the Galatians are no longer under the bondage of the Mosaic Law but the grace
of God. Abraham’s two wives, Hagar and Sarah, are taken figuratively to represent
two different covenants – the Law-binding covenant and the covenant of grace. Each
one’s offspring, Ishmael and Isaac, is interpreted as representing the child of
slave and the child of promise, respectively.
The allegorical
interpretation of Ishmael, the child of slave, therefore, refers to the Jewish
people who were enslaved to the Law, while Isaac, the child of promise, refers
to the Galatians and all the believers who have received freedom and the
promise of heavenly inheritance. The main exegetical issue is the allegorical
interpretation that Paul employs to make a case for the doctrine of
justification, whether the method is warranted, and whether we should interpret
it differently.
Context
A.
Historical-Cultural Context
1) The Author
Scholars have little
disagreement on the authorship of the letter. Paul was the author of the
letter. In the opening greeting of the letter, Paul draws attention to his
apostolic status which he claims to have been given “not from men nor through
man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father” (v. 1:1).
By identifying himself as a God-appointed apostle, he emphasizes his authority in
conveying the admonishment and counseling to the readers. He augments his
apostolic authority by proclaiming that the gospel he previously preached to
the Galatians was also received “through a revelation of Jesus Christ” (v.
1:12).
He provides an additional statement
to amplify his apostolic significance by asserting that he was set apart “before
[he] was born” (v. 1:15) so that he “might preach him [the Son] among the
Gentiles” (v. 1:16). This assertion reminds us of the call of Prophet Jeremiah
(Jer. 1:5). In that passage, God proclaims that Jeremiah was known before he
was “formed in the womb” and “appointed a prophet to the nations.” Paul brings
attention to the God’s special treatment of Jeremiah to claim his predestined
calling to be an apostle for Gentiles. Paul is not modest in claiming his
apostolic authority and the predestined calling. The authority of his apostolic
status, the authenticity of the gospel he preached, and the claim of his
predestined calling set the stage for what he has to say to the Galatians.
A very brief and somewhat incomplete
account of his conversion experience is narrated in verses 1:13-16, where he
recounts that he persecuted the church, was extremely zealous for the
traditions, but God revealed his Son to him. This brief account of his
conversion may be enough to see him as a Jew steeped in the legalistic
practices but was converted to the faith by a miraculous grace of God. An obstinate
guardian of the Law and the traditions of the Jews could only be converted by a
supernatural intervention from God. Once converted, however, “in matters of
doctrinal importance,” he became “as unbending as hardened steel.”
2) The Occasion
Paul addresses the letter to the churches in Galatia, but the
precise location of Galatia is disputed. Galatia may refer to North Galatia,
the territory originally occupied by the migrant Gauls. It may also refer to
South Galatia, which included the cities of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe,
all of which Paul evangelized on his first missionary journey. Different
opinions abound regarding the letter’s destination, but the fact that he previously
journeyed through the cities favors the term Galatia referring to South
Galatia.
Therefore, we acknowledge that the original audience or recipients of the
letter were churches in South Galatia.
Paul and Barnabas evangelized the cities
in the province of South Galatia (Acts 13-14). But after they left the scene, apparently
some Jewish Christians, also known as Judaizers, came into the area and taught a
“different gospel” (v. 1:6). They taught that “those who embrace the Christian
salvation must submit to Jewish law, the Torah.”
In particular, circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath were pressed on the
Galatians.
These were the “legislative pieces that established ‘boundary markers’ – the
practices that differentiated Jews from other people.”
This situation constituted the occasion for Paul to write the letter and
provides a brief historical-cultural context for the passage.
3)
The Author’s Theology
Note that the “new
perspective on Paul” of Sanders and his followers disputes that “merit
theology” or works-righteousness characterized the first-century Judaism, and
that Paul’s doctrine of justification did not pit works against faith (or
grace). Rather, Jews believed in “covenantal nomism,” that is, observing the Law
was considered as the “boundary marker” as a member of the exclusive covenant
community of Israel instead of earning merits for righteousness. According to
the new perspective, Paul’s radical challenge to Judaism should be understood
as his appeal to the universalism that Gentiles could come to God in Christ
apart from observing the Torah, in that Jewish practices of circumcision, food
laws, and Sabbath are replaced by faith.
Note also that Sanders’ covenantal
nomism is being reassessed after an initial near universal acceptance. “The
pendulum which had swung too far toward the side of denying any element of
works-righteousness in Second Temple Judaism has begun to swing back.”
Our approach to the historical-cultural context stays away from the notion of covenantal
nomism, but follows the traditional Reformers’ understanding of Paul’s doctrine
of justification.
B.
Literary Context
In terms of the literary context, the flow of Paul’s thought starts
from the declaration of his God-given apostolic authority and the authenticity
of the gospel he preached. Unlike most other letters he wrote, however, Paul includes
no customary thanksgiving in the opening. His intense feeling and concern must
have overwhelmed him to skip the part. He spent no time to attack the false
teachers (Judaizers), using such a harsh word as “accursed” twice (v. 1:8 and
v. 1:9). After a brief narration of his calling, he mentions his acceptance by
and alliance with the Apostles in Jerusalem. The intention of including the
part is probably to support his authority to present the doctrine of
justification, which appears in Chapters 2 and 3, right up to the passage of our
interest.
He makes it clear that “a person is
not justified by works of the Law but through faith in Jesus Christ” (v. 2:16).
Then in Chapter 3, he cites the faith of Abraham to illustrate the point that righteousness
is obtain by faith and not by works of the Law. Two points are of our interest
as they are related to the passage: First, the covenant that Abraham made with
God precedes the Law (v. 3:17); second, the believers who are in Christ are
Abraham’s offspring, heirs of promise (v. 3:29). In Chapter 4, Paul uses the
term, elementary principles, to denote the Law, expressing concern for
the Galatians’ return to observing the principles. Specifically, he mentions
their observing “days and months and seasons and years” (v. 4:10).
More serious matter of observing circumcision is dealt with right
after the passage of our exegetical interest. In Chapter 5, after emphasizing
the meaninglessness of circumcision, Paul’s thought flow changes from the
futileness of circumcision to denouncing the desires of the flesh. For Bruce, flesh,
sarx in Greek, means “weak human nature,” “sinfulness,” although Christ,
who came in real flesh and shared his humanity with all mankind, “did not come
in ‘sinful flesh’,” and denotes “unregenerate humanity.”
The denouncing of fleshly desires may be an indication of the influence of “popular
Stoicism, which were in the air at the time.”
Then, he changes to circumcision from flesh as the symbol that represents the Law
(v. 6:13). However, except for the observation of seasons and circumcision, the
observation of the food law and Sabbath is not discussed in the letter. Perhaps
circumcision was enough for him to make a distinction between the Law and faith.
Content
A. Allegorical
Interpretation
The
most striking feature of the passage is that it is entirely written
figuratively or allegorically. Paul explains the difference between the covenant
of the Law and the covenant of grace allegorically with an example of the story
of Hagar and Sarah. A careful distinction is due here between allegorizing and
allegorical interpretation. Note that the story was not narrated in the
Scripture as an allegory by the author of the story. But Paul interprets it
allegorically as he mentions, “Now this may be interpreted allegorically” (v.
4:24).
It
was Philo who first believed that “only the allegorical method could reveal the
true inner meaning that God had encoded in them.”
His problem is that he relied too much upon the Platonic philosophy and failed
to distinguish between biblical ideas and Greek philosophy.
After
Philo, more prominent church fathers read the Bible allegorically. Clement of
Alexandria employed the Platonic dualistic idea to the interpretation of
Scripture. Origen, his successor, applied three-fold approach to it, for he
thought that as humans consist of body, soul, and spirit, so should Scripture
have three-fold meaning.
But his
interpretations of biblical passages are far-fetched in most cases. Similar
interpretative fallacies are found in Augustine and many others in the ages and
the present day, in which the textual meanings are relegated to “less
significant and fanciful” meanings unrelated to the texts.
Here in the passage, Paul does not allegorize the story. Hence, he does not deny
or alter the literal and original meaning of the story. Instead, he interprets
the original story allegorically, giving the story an “additional” meaning.
Another
caution is also due when
spiritualizing a text. Duvall and Hays argue
that there is danger in reader-based spiritualization and prefer to take the
literary meaning rather than a spiritualized meaning.
They
also argue that “the dichotomy is not between literary meaning and spiritual
meaning. The dichotomy is between the meaning the authors intended and the
meaning a reader dreams up and projects into the text.”
How
proper is it then that Paul takes the spiritual meaning from the text? I do not
believe that Paul draws the spiritual meaning from the text but rather uses the
text to explain the spiritual content, that is, the doctrine of justification.
B. Exegesis
1) The Galatians’ mindset and an allusion to Abraham’s two wives
4:22-23.
The two sons of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac, are distinguished: The former was
born by
a slave woman, and the latter, by
a free woman; the
former was born according to the
flesh, and the latter, through
promise.
Here,
flesh is translated as “the ordinary way” in NIV version, but it
implies “fallen human nature working in its own natural strength.”
So, Paul finds flesh and promise as the symbolic representations of the Law and
grace, respectively. In Chapters 5 and 6, circumcision is represented as the
Law.
2) The allegorical interpretation of Hagar and Sarah
4:24-26. The
contrast rhetoric is repeated in other forms:
Hagar vs.
Sarah;
Sinai
covenant vs. (new)
covenant;
slavery vs.
free; and
present
Jerusalem vs.
Jerusalem from above. Hagar corresponds to the covenant
made in Mount Sinai, the Mosaic Law, and the slavery that she was under, which is
what observing the Law entails. Sarah corresponds to the new covenant established
by Christ by having faith in him, and freedom from the bondage of the Law. But
Paul brings in Jerusalem and connects the two bifurcating elements to the two different
types of Jerusalem – present Jerusalem and future Jerusalem that will come from
above. Apparently, Paul is projecting and connecting his doctrinal underpinning
to his eschatological view, for his thought is “strongly influenced by the eschatological
view.”
4:27. The
quotation is from Isaiah 54:1, which prophecies the restoration of Israel. This
passage appears right after the description of the suffering Messiah and bears the
eternal promise of mercy and peace for Israel. Beyond the message of the restoration
from the Exile, it depicts Israel’s millennial blessings.
Hence, the quotation of the verse is an indication that Paul has in mind to
connect his doctrine to eternal implication. Sarah, the free but barren woman,
corresponding to the covenant of Christ by faith, would enjoy a greater progeny
than Hagar, which in turn corresponds to the eternal blessing we will enjoy
when new Jerusalem comes from above.
3) The application of the allegorical interpretation
4:28-29. Paul
compares
Isaac to Christians,
the children of promise. Isaac,
born through promise (v. 23) is, in fact, born
according to the Spirit
(v. 29). A gist of the doctrine of regeneration appears in the verse. The
promise that Christians have received refers to salvation.
Here,
Paul compares Ishmael’s persecution of Isaac to the false teachers’ opposition
to the nascent believers in the Galatian Church. But an application of this
case can be made to the persecution by the Jewish people to the believers at the
time of the first century beyond the persecution by the “agitators” (Judaizers)
to the believers in the Galatian Church, because the term,
so it is now (
οὕτως καὶ νῦν) does not seem to have the implication only for the
situation in the Galatian Church, but many other churches in the first century.
The universal truth is that believers are bound to be persecuted by the
children born according to the flesh, that is, non-believers in general (Matt.
10:16-23; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17).
4:30-31. Verse
4:30 is the quotation of Sarah’s plea to Abraham (Gen. 21:10), which was granted
by God (Gen. 21:12). So, it was God’s expulsion of them rather than Abraham’s
or Sarah’s. Readers may wonder how the son of the slave woman’s “mocking” (in
NIV translation) is regarded as persecution by Paul (v. 4:29), or how that
became a ground for the expulsion of Hagar and her son. Calvin interprets that Ishmael’s
persecution was worse than done by the sword, for he “treated him with haughty
disdain by trampling underfoot the promise of God.”
God
said, “it was through Isaac Abraham’s offspring be named” (Gen. 21:12). God’s
intention was clear. He wanted to establish a nation from the son of promise. “Casting
out of Ishmael was nothing else than the consequence and the accomplishment of [his]
promise”
A careful attention
is due to the quotation, for it should be treated with more than an allegorical
interpretation. This quotation is a case for typology and a spiritual meaning is
hidden in it. When God commanded to expel the poor woman and her son, there was
a hidden spiritual message in the command. The hidden message is fully
manifested when Paul brings the meaning out as he interprets it. It means that the
Law-observers cannot share the inheritance of salvation and eternal
blessing promised to the ones who have faith in Christ. Therefore, for the
expulsion part, the literal (or historical) meaning can be superseded by the
spiritual meaning.
This point is
shared by Keener: “The allegorical correspondences appear especially in 4:24–
26; by contrast, 4:28– 31 can function typologically, based on principles and
analogies.”
The expulsion was God’s intentional
intervention, perhaps unbeknownst to the author, a type waiting for a full
manifestation of the type in the New Testament.
Application
Some
believe that the story of Hagar and Sarah may not be the basis of the doctrine
of justification, for Paul already explained it in the previous chapter.
Yet, the allegorical interpretation of the story renders an additional case for
the doctrine. Paul argues that observation of the Law does not make one
righteous, but grace of God that is obtained through faith in Christ makes one
righteous. For the former, there will be no inheritance of salvation and
eternal blessing, but for the latter, it already been given and will be fully
realized when new Jerusalem comes from above.
Believers
should not fall for the false gospel, particularly the one that appeals to
legalism. False teachings, heresies, false religions and philosophies are abounding
today. Paul’s fierce charge against the Judaizers is severe and we should watch
out for sneaky wolves attempting to allure away the simple minded, the
confused, and backsliders. Some may think that doctrines are not important in
faith and only the relationship with God matters. That is not true. Sound
doctrines, based firmly on the gospel, are of paramount importance. Churches
must teach the right doctrines, particularly the doctrine of salvation, and
believers should diligently heed to the teachings.
Bibliography
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians,
Vol. XXI. Translated by Rev. William Pringle. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
2005.
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction
to the New Testament, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MS: Zondervan, 2005.
Duvall, J. Scott, and J. Daniel Hays. Grasping
God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the
Bible, 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MS: Zondervan, 2019.
Keener, Craig
S. Galatians. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Presse, 2018.
Klein, William
W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical
Interpretation, 3rd. ed. Grand Rapids, MS: Zondervan, 2017.
Lea,
Thomas D., and David Alan Black. The New Testament: Its Background and
Message, 2nd ed. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publisher,
2003.
Moo, Douglas
J., Robert Yarbrough, and Robert Stein, Galatians. Grand Rapids, MS:
Baker Publishing Group, 2013.
Seyoon. Paul
and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand
Rapids, MS: Eerdmans, 2002.
Walvoord, John
F., and Roy B. Zuck, eds. The Bible
Knowledge Commentary. Wheaton, Ill.: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.,
1983.
Wenham, G.J.,
J.A. Motyer, D.A. Carson, and R.T. France, eds. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Downers
Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1994.
