Galatians 4:31

Gal_4:31

We are not children of the bondwomn, but of the free.

Nature and the supernatural

The whole force of this application of the allegory lies in the truth of the facts. It is because the birth of Isaac was supernatural that St. Paul was able to find in it what he here bids us see. What Isaac was in the miracle of his origin that is the Christian in the miracle of his regeneration. What Hagar and Ishmael hated in Isaac was the interference of God with the laws of nature. This spirit caused the strife and the ejection. So it is now.

I. The Jew has his covenant from Sinai. Call that Hagar. Set it in the same row with Jerusalem that now is. See her gendering to bondage, bearing her offspring into a condition of spiritual servitude, the condition of all who trust in the flesh.

II. The Christian has his covenant, and its home is above. He is a child not of the flesh but of the Spirit. He is born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh, but of supernatural graces.

III. Nature cries out against grace, and regards it as an interference with creature rights and dignity, and mocks and persecutes, and must be ejected, at last, from the family and the home of the free.

IV. Apply this to scepticism. It is the boast of anti-supernaturalism that it is free. It has cast off the shackles of tradition, authority, priestcraft. Freethought is its watchword. Paul here brings a charge against it under the figure of Hagar and Ishmael, whose characteristic was dislike of the supernatural.

1. Unbelief in rejecting the supernatural rejects pardon and Christ, grace and the Holy Spirit.

2. This is a state of bondage. For what hope is there for man in nature?

(1) None as he turns remorsefully towards the past. Nature crushes the sinner.

(2) None as he looks wistfully towards the future. Mark the poor tentative, vacillating peradventures in reconstructing himself in holiness. Mark the self-vexing O Baal, hear us of the man who will not grasp the Divine Sanctifier.

3. If we would be free from the slavery of sin and despair, we must seek forgiveness through Christ and sanctification through-the Holy Spirit. (Dean Vaughan.)

Christianity the home and the hope of the free

I. The nature of true freedom.

1. The absence of all restraint.

2. The worldling is not free.

3. Man naturally desires freedom.

II. The Church of Christ as the home of the truly free.

1. It is a voluntary association.

2. It is well adapted to promote human happiness.

3. It is a state of preparation and training for higher scenes.

III. The province of the church in diffusing the true freedom of the race.

1. What it has done.

2. Would do.

3. Can do, as the hope of the free.

Learn: gospel freedom is necessary, for it alone can--

(1) make other freedom possible;

(2) valuable;

(3) permanent. (W. R. Williams.)

Abrahams two sons

We must keep this faith pure; For it is written that Abraham had two sons. This fact of history, the Holy Ghost shows us, is an allegory, exposing the fatal bondage into which the Galatians were gliding. In the two sons of Abraham we see--

I. The bondage of the law.

1. Hagars son was born after the flesh, in the common course of nature. That which is born of the flesh is flesh (Joh_3:6).. We inherit an evil nature, inclined to sin, yet miserable in it. No natural man is really happy (Isa_57:21-22); he is always sinful (Jer_17:9).

2. Hagars son was born in bondage. She a bondwoman; her child, though Abrahams son, a bondslave, under the law of the house. Here is the old covenant: For this Agar denotes Mount Sinai. There Israel consented to a covenant of works (Exo_24:1-18.; Deu_5:2-3), which results in failure and bondage. Hagar brings forth only bondmen: this is all the law can do. The strength of sin is the law (1Co_15:5-6).

3. Hagars son was a persecutor. He derides, mocks, persecutes the promised seed. The world, Israel, hated Christ. The law cannot endure grace (Luk_15:2). The natural cannot tolerate the spiritual (1Co_2:14; 1Jn_3:1). Here is the mind of Cain. Hagars son was Abrahams son. This increased the hostility. Religion is often religions greatest enemy. Our claim to be perfectly justified by faith, without the law, arouses animosity (Joh_8:33).

4. Hagars son was cast out: he had no title; he could inherit nothing. His continuance in the house depended on his obedience. Obedience to law avails not for justification (Psa_143:2); it only brings curse (Gal_3:10), and wrath (Rom_4:15), rejection (Gal_5:2; Joh_8:35); it confers no claim to inheritance. Christ the only way to God, to heaven (Joh_14:6). If not in Christ, of the faith of Abraham (Rom_4:16), we are yet in our sins (Joh_8:24). But think of Christs--by no means cast out (Joh_6:37).

II. The liberty of the gospel.

1. The freewomans son was the child of promise. Abraham and Sarah being as good as dead (Heb_11:12), their child was born, not in the course of nature, but by Gods gracious power (Rom_4:17-21). We, brethren, as Isaac was, i.e., after the manner of Isaac, are the children of promise (Rom_9:8; 2Ti_1:1). Our sonship is not the result of legal obedience, or culture, or of man in any way (Joh_1:12). We are counted dead, and have been quickened by the Holy Ghost, by the grace of God (Rom_9:11).

2. The freewomans son was born free, free from the conditions of the bondslaves law. For us, who by faith are justified, the law is, in that respect, dead (Rom_7:4; Gal_2:19). Its condemning hold is broken. In Christ its claims are satisfied. It is no longer an outer law, restraining, convicting; but an inner law, in which we delight (Rom_7:22 : Psa_1:2), and which, by love, we fulfil (Rom_8:4), through the Spirit. This is real liberty. Whose service is perfect freedom.

3. The freewomans son was persecuted. This we must expect if we are faithful, to be mocked (Joh_15:20), especially in the last days (2Ti_3:12). The offence of the cross has not ceased. Blessed are the meek, etc.

4. The freewomans son was the heir. The children of promise are counted for the seed, and are heirs according to the promise. Jerusalem above is a city of freemen (Gal_3:19; Rom_8:17; 1Pe_1:3-4).

Conclusion.

1. Let us hold fast (Gal_5:1) our liberty in Christ, and beware of legal bondage.

2. Let us use our liberty in active, loving service (Gal_5:13).

3. Let us meekly suffer, in patient hope, for His sake. (J. E. Sampson, M. A.)

The ways of religion are not and cannot be pleasant to irreligious men

It is to renewed and holy persons that the assertion refers, and to them only; for our pleasures must be suitable to our prevailing dispositions and predominant tempers. Light itself affords no pleasure to the blind, nor can the most exquisite music yield any gratification to the deaf. An idle man has no enjoyment in labour, nor a glutton or a drunkard in temperance and sobriety. Those very things which the spiritual mind most relishes and desires are to the carnal mind distasteful and offensive. (Dr. Bruiting.)

.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

E. Admonition to perseverance in Christian freedom—with a threatening allusion to the pernicious consequences of the opposite course

Gal_4:31 to Gal_5:6

31So then [Wherefore],41 brethren, we are not children of the [a] bondwoman, but 5 of the free. 1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free [Stand fast therefore in the liberty for which Christ made us free, or For freedom Christ made Us free. Stand fast therefore],42 and be not entangled again with 2[in] the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul43 say unto you, that if ye be circumcised 3[i. e., submit to circumcision],44 Christ shall [will] profit you nothing. For [Moreover, δέ continuative] I testify again to every man that is circumcised [who has himself circumcised], that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4Christ is become of no effect unto you [Ye are separated from Christ],45 whosoever of you are justified [being justified] by [in] the law; ye are fallen [fallen away] from grace. 5For we through 6[by] the Spirit wait46 for the hope of righteousness by [from] faith. For in Jesus Christ [Christ Jesus] neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by [working through] love.

F. Renewed lamentation over the apostasy of the Galatians. Sharp testimony against the misleading misrepresentations of his preaching on the part of the false teachers

Gal_5:7-12

7Ye did run [were running] well; who did hinder47 you that ye should not obey 8, 9the truth?48 This [The] persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little 10leaven leaveneth49 the whole lump. I [I, for my part] have confidence in [as regards] you through [in] the Lord, that ye will be none [in nothing] otherwise 11minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. And [But] I, brethren, if I yet [still] preach circumcision, why do I yet [still] suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased [the scandal of the cross done away with]. 12I would they were even cut off which trouble you [I would that they who are unsettling you would even mutilate themselves, or would even cut themselves off from you].50

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Gal_4:31. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman.—Paul, after the indirect warning in Gal_4:29-30, sums up the contents of Gal_4:22 sq. once more, in an exact form, appealing to the Christian sense of dignity =you will therefore surely not suffer yourselves to be reduced to children of the bondwoman. [Notice the omission of the article: “not of any bondwoman,” Judaism or any form of heathenism (Lightfoot, Meyer, Ellicott). This explanation is more striking and appropriate than that of Alford, who is disposed to think παιδίσκης is anarthrous, because emphatically prefixed to its governing noun.—R.]—But of the free,—therefore ourselves free. This Paul expressly states in the following sentence.

Gal_5:1, refers the freedom of Christians to Christ; yet the main idea is no longer the fact or method of their having become free, but the end, namely: τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ, for freedom, for being and remaining free. Then follows the admonition itself; στήκετε, used absolutely, without any modifying clause=remain firm. [Schmoller follows Lachmann, in beginning a new sentence with στήκετε; of course if a different punctuation is adopted, the verb is modified by the preceding clause, without altering its meaning however. He also takes τῇ ἐλευθερία as dative commodi, “for freedom,” not instrumental, “with freedom” (so Alford). It must be remarked that this pointing makes the style very abrupt, and that since the stress in this interpretation rests on for freedom, the end of their being made free, so emphatic a thought would scarcely be expressed by a dative of doubtful force, for as Lightfoot observes, the dative is awkward, in whatever way it is taken. Even Meyer explains the passage far more satisfactorily, on the theory that the other reading is correct. Following this reading, we render: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty for” or “with which Christ made us free.” The prominent dative then denotes “the sphere in which and to which the action is limited” (Ellicott); and the relative ῇ is either dative commodi (Winer, Ellicott) or ablative (instrumental, Luther, Beza, Calvin). Meyer thinks this latter usage is uncommon with Paul. The former is safer. The sense is then: therefore stand fast in that liberty (which is our state as children of the freewoman, and) for which, to remain in which, Christ made us free.—R.]

Be not entangled again.—As Gentiles they had not formerly been under the yoke of the Mosaic law, but for all that had certainly (see Gal_4:8) been in bondage; having now become free from it by their faith in Christ, they ought not to allow themselves to be enslaved again by a yoke. [In the yoke of bondage.—“In” it, because the thought is of being ensnared; they were to stand upright, not to bow to the yoke (Lightfoot); “bondage” was its predominant nature (Ellicott).—R.] All that preceded, doctrinal exposition and expostulation, pointed to this exhortation: to remain free. But just because this lies at the foundation of everything preceding, the brief, plain utterance in this verse suffices, and the Apostle at once turns to a warning menace in case the admonition should not be heeded, and the Galatians instead should go so far as to submit to circumcision.

Gal_5:2. Behold I Paul say unto you that if ye be circumcised.—Rousing personal attention with “Behold” and with the interposition of his personal authority,11 “I Paul,” he warns them against the final step, not yet taken by them, which would bring them completely under the yoke of the law, namely, the receiving of circumcision. [It is highly probable that some of them had been circumcised, and that the present points to the continuance of this course of conduct among them (Alford, Ellicott). He does not mean that the fact of a man’s being a circumcised man would prevent his being a Christian, but if after all this instruction and warning, they resorted to this rite as necessary to salvation, “Christ will,” etc.—R.] They would then have had no advantage of Christ, because they would have sought salvation, in circumcision and not of Christ.—Will profit you nothing.—The future is probably (as in Gal_5:5) to be referred to the παρουσία and the establishment of the Messianic kingdom. [So Meyer, who finds in this a reference to its nearness. But he is fond of such references. Ellicott with more propriety says: “it simply marks the certain result of such a course of practice; ‘Christ (as you will find) will never profit you anything.’ ”—R.]

Gal_5:3. Moreover I testify again.—Paul strengthens his warning by referring to a further consequence of receiving circumcision. It obliges to the observance of the whole law; “for circumcision makes one a full participant in the covenant of law, a proselyte of righteousness, and the law demands of the one that is held to it its complete fulfilment (Gal_3:10).” Meyer. At the same time Paul gives with this a more precise explanation of “Christ will profit you nothing” so much the more certainly will this be the case, because a man by receiving circumcision becomes a debtor to do the whole law, and therefore is not at liberty to persuade himself, that he does not mean to erect again the law as a whole, but only to accept one point. But all, who are “of the works of the law are under the curse,” Gal_3:10.—In view of the solemnity of the asseveration we must suppose that the false teachers designedly concealed this perilous consequence of circumcision or sought to soften it. “Again” alludes to the earlier (second) presence of the Apostle.

Gal_5:4. Ye are separated from Christ.—“Paul by speaking asyndetically and recurring to the second person speaks so much the more emphatically and vividly.”—Meyer.—The verse expresses the consequence of becoming “a debtor to do the whole law” (for ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθαι is substantially identically with this). This is the καταργ. ἀπὸ τοῦ Χρισποῦ which completes the explanation of the declaration in Gal_5:2.—Καταργεῖσθαι ἀπό τινος, a pregnant expression = the connection in which one stands with any one is done away, and so one is loose from him.—Justification by the law and justification for Christ’s sake are mutually exclusive; whoever seeks the first falls out of fellowship with Christ. Justified, here of course an expression representing the view of the persons concerned, who think “through the law we shall be justified.”—Ye are fallen away from grace.—Here he expressly names the benefit the loss of which they suffer by “being justified in the law” and the resulting separation from Christ. A cutting contrast: they think that they are being justified, but by this very means instead they are fallen away from grace, so far is an actual justification from being possible in this way.12 Ἐκπίπτειν τῆς χάριτος opposed to ἑστηκέναι ἐν τῇ χάριτι (Rom_5:2).

Gal_5:5. For we by the spirit wait for the hope of righteousness from faith.—“A justification of the judgment passed in Gal_5:4 upon those that seek to be justified through the law, drawn e contrario, i. e., from the entirely different manner in which Paul and those like him wish to be justified.” Meyer. [“We” i. e. those who have not sought justification in the law, and fallen from grace; the contrast is not very strongly marked in the subject however (δέ is not used), for Paul addresses the Galatians, not as those who had fallen, but were in danger of falling, and the subject “we” may include them also.—R.] Πνεύματι is used neither of the human spirit in itself, nor of the spirit of man enlightened by the Holy Ghost, but of the Spirit of God as the objective principle of the Christian life. As it is from the Holy Spirit working in believers, that the whole Christian life proceeds, so in particular the persevering Christian hope is thus wrought, of the fulfilment of which he also gives pledge (2Co_1:22; 2Co_5:5, Eph_1:14; Rom_3:11-23). So Wieseler and Meyer. But of course this hope of future righteousness proceeds from the Holy Ghost only so far as it rests upon a right basis. This basis is then stated in ἐκ πίστεως, which is meant to express that Christians ground their hope of future righteousness not upon the works of the law, but precisely on faith alone, that they hope to be justified not in the law but by faith. [Ἐκπίστεως does not therefore describe πνεύματι (Luther), but the latter sets forth the agent: “by the spirit,” the former the origin or source (Schmoller says with less exactness, the ground) of their hope. “By faith” cannot qualify “righteousness,” as the order of the E. V. seems to indicate.—R.] Δικαιοσύνη is here also of course, Righteousness before God = δικαίωσις. But this is here represented for Christians as something future; we are therefore not to understand it of that which takes place in time, but of the δικαίωσις which comes to completion only at the final judgment. But it is a difficulty that it does not simply read: ἐλπίδα δικ. ἔχομεν, but ἐλπ. ἀπεκδ. whereby the hope itself is presented in turn as an object of hope. Ἐλπίς is therefore here to be understood as the object of hope, res sperata, as in Col_1:5; Tit_2:13, and δικαιοσύνης as genitive of apposition. Ἀπεκδέχεσθαι is more precisely not = ἐλπίζειν itself, but = to wait for, to expect perseveringly (Wieseler). [This view of the passage, which is that of Wieseler, avoids the seeming pleonasm, “wait for the hope,” but is open to one serious objection, viz.: that the genitive is never thus used with ἐλπίς (Meyer). Besides ἐλπίδα ἀπεκδεχόμεθα is not pleonastic, but forcible and almost poetical, the accusative being cognate (Ellicott). The genitive may be regarded as 1) subjecti; the hoped for reward of righteousness, sc. eternal life (so Beza, Bengel and most older commentators). This avoids the seeming difficulty of every other interpretation, viz.: making “righteousness” future, but it is not in keeping with the context, as it introduces and gives prominence to an adjunct of “righteousness,” while the passage treats of “justification.” 2) It seems best then to take it as genitive objecti, i. e. the hope of being justified (so Meyer, Ellicott, Alford, also the versions of Tyndale and Cranmer). This is strictly grammatical and in keeping with the context. The objection that it makes “righteousness” future is easily met, see below.—R.] That Paul should here speak of the (complete and final) justification, as something to be expected first in the future, is entirely accordant with the context. In Gal_5:4 he speaks of such as, being already justified by faith, now turn to the law and thereby suffer the loss of grace. In order to illustrate the latter, he now enforces the truth, that a Christian must remain in faith, because only then can he have the hope of justification at the judgment; faith remains the condition of the state of grace, for even at the final judgment it is the condition of gracious acceptance. [This view contrasts Christianity with Judaism, and represents “justification as one of those divine results, which stretches into eternity, conveying with it and involving the idea of future blessedness and glorification” (Ellicott).—R.]

Gal_5:6. He now proceeds to justify the waiting “for the hope from faith” on the part of the Christian. For in Christ Jesus = for him that is in Christ Jesus, for the Christian, neither circumcision availeth anything = has no influence in the attainment of justification (in the sense of Gal_5:5), nor uncircumcision (while the Galatian false teachers laid so great stress upon this distinction); but faith working through love, faith which shows itself operative through love.—Ἐνεργεῖσθαι is always middle in the New Testament. The passive meaning given by many of the older Catholics, as Bellarmine and Estius, in the interest of the Catholic system, is therefore incorrect. Reference is made to this display of the activity of faith through love, in view of the following section Gal_5:13 sq., the theme of which is given in our verse. [Lightfoot: “These words bridge over the gulf which seems to separate the language of St. Paul and St. James. Both assert a principle of practical energy, as opposed to a barren, inactive theory.” Against the use made of this passage by modern Romanist commentators who give up the passive sense, such as Windischmann, Möhler, Symbolik, see Alford and Doctrinal Notes below.—R.]

Gal_5:7. Ye were running well.—Short, emotional, and therefore asyndetic propositions respecting the unhappy alterations which had taken place with the Galatians.—The comparison of the Christian walk to a race is, as is well known, a favorite one with Paul. The running well consisted in obedience to the truth, that is, in their going in the true=evangelical, way, seeking their righteousness in faith.—Paul asks in surprise: Who did hinder you?13

Gal_5:8. He here answers the last assertion to himself and them. Certainly, it is not God that has turned you away, has brought you upon this other way! The intriguing of the false teachers is represented as something ungodly. Ἡ πεισμ. κ. τ. λ., therefore, is to be translated; The persuading is not from your caller=God. The calling and the persuading are opposed to each other as distinct in character; the former is divine activity, the latter not, but essentially human with human intention, art, importunity (Meyer).—In itself “persuasion” could have also a passive signification=the being persuaded, disposition to follow; and so many interpreters take it here also=obsequiousness towards the false teachers. [In favor of the latter meaning we have the support of the Greek expositors, and perhaps the paranomasia (πείθεσθαι, ver 7). But Meyer, Alford, Ellicott prefer the active meaning, both because it is better established, and because it suits the active meaning of “calleth.” It seems to accord better with Gal_5:9 also.—R.]

Gal_5:9. A little leaven.—It is disputed whether this refers to doctrine or persons; a little leaven of doctrine, as a few bad men, false teachers. Manifestly the former. It is not the number of the false teachers that is of account, but the influence of their teaching, not the πείθοντες but the πεισμονή. Plainly nothing else is meant by “leaven” than the immediately preceding “persuasion,” for of this, “leaven” is an image. As the leaven works into the lump, so does the “persuasion,” the persuasive, seducing word into the soul (or into a whole community): therefore=even an influence in itself apparently insignificant, may nevertheless be ruinous to the whole man (or whole community of men). [The proverb (quoted also 1Co_5:6) is undoubtedly true both of doctrines and persons. To which it refers here is extremely doubtful. In support of each view the best commentators may be cited, and the context is not decisive, for while Gal_5:8 may favor the former reference, Gal_5:10 with its individualizing turn, favors the latter. Leaven is, as usually, a symbol of evil.—R.] This of course contains a warning to be on their guard, and to turn back in time, and remove the leaven.—The Apostle, in order the easier to win them to him, expresses the confidence which he still continues to have in them.

Gal_5:10. I, for my part,—even though the false teachers believe you already won over to them.—He knows his confidence to be grounded in the Lord. The Lord will doubtless bring it to pass and give you the right mind—in the interest of His cause.—Οὐδὲν ἄλλο φρονήσετε is best taken absolutely=that you will not be otherwise minded than hitherto, that you will not alter your conviction, will not apostatize. It is true, a giving way had indeed already begun; but it was as yet only in its incipiency; evidently Paul deals with them throughout as those that are yet wavering, and therefore it may well be hoped of them that matters will not come to an actual ἄλλο φρονεῖν=change of conviction. Up to the present time they are only, as is immediately expressed, “troubled.”—He that troubleth you=every one, who, &c. The supposition that the Apostle refers to a leader among his opponents well known to himself (Erasmus, Luther, Bengel and others), or even to Peter (Jerome), is supported by nothing in the Epistle. Therefore also whosoever he be ought to be understood as entirely general, and not referred to any eminent consideration enjoyed by the false teachers. Undoubtedly, however, Paul means to signify, that no consideration whatever could cause him to waver in this judgment.—Κρῖμα=God’s sentence of condemnation (e. g. Mar_12:40, Luk_20:47; Rom_2:3; Rom_13:12); this is conceived as something exceedingly irksome, a burden, therefore βαστάσει.

Gal_5:11. But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision.—Paul refutes moreover the pretence of the false teachers, invented to further their cause, that he himself elsewhere preached circumcision. They had probably appealed, in support of their charge, to the circumcision of Timothy, which had lately taken place, but which by no means took place on the ground of its necessity to salvation (Act_16:3. See I moreover, the explanation of Gal_2:4).—“Still” dates not from a period within his apostolic career itself, as though Paul as Apostle had yet at one time preached circumcision, which in view of the manner of Paul’s conversion and of his whole previous course is an unpsychological and unhistorical assumption, but it dates from his conversion. Why do I still suffer persecution.—This second ἔτι is a logical one: what reason remains, etc.?—Then is the scandal of the cross done away with.—Apodosis of the conditional sentence, “if I still preach circumcision,” for the purpose of demonstrating the nullity of the protasis: he would no longer be persecuted.—Τὸ σκάνδ. τοῦ σταυροῦ more precisely—that, which is offensive in the preceding of Christ’s death on the cross, namely, that it is proclaimed as the only ground of salvation. Had Paul, with this or instead of it, still preached circumcision as necessary to salvation, the Jew would have seen his law maintained in authority, and would not have taken offence at the death on the cross, and especially the preaching of it.

Gal_5:12. Ὄφελον καὶ ἀποκόψονται.—The ordinary explanation is: Would that they would even have themselves made eunuchs, for which partly the middle signification of the future ἀποκόψονται is cited, partly the connection, which is thought to point (καί) to a play of words upon περιτομή. But, as this would be a bitter turn of wit, and as the assumption, that Paul means thereby to lash the sexual intemperance of the false teachers, is arbitrary, it is not pleasant to accede to this explanation. The lexical argument, which has the most weight, is the hardest to meet; it can only be said that the passive use of the future middle, even in the classics, is by no means unknown. On the other hand the connection, which is especially adduced in support of this explanation, has not a strictly demonstrative force, as Wieseler remarks. He, it is true, lays almost too much stress on the absence of an actual paronomasia; on the fact that Paul did not at least choose ἐκτείνειν, as being a very common word among the Greeks for castration, and the paronomasia with κατατομή (Phil. 3:23) proves at least so much as this, that Paul in opposition to such Judaizers, was not particularly tender in dealing with περιτομή, for this is a sarcastic allusion to περιτομή. On the other hand this remark of his particularly is correct, that we should then expect instead of ἀναστ. an allusion to περιτ., the more so, as in Gal_5:11 περιτ. is not at all alluded to in the light of a demand made by them. If we can therefore make up our minds to take ἀποκ. as passive, this would be in itself entirely suitable, especially for the final sentence: Would they were even hewn off=condemned by God (since the reference to excommunication is less congruous). Καί certainly is far from necessitating the reference to περιτ., as with either explanation it is alike a climactic particle. [It seems entirely incorrect to take the passive sense, for which there is no authority in the New Testament. Ellicott, preserves the middle sense, and yet avoids the seemingly coarse interpretation, which is usually given. He renders: “would even cut themselves off from you.” Unfortunately καί is a climactic particle, and this view gives us an anti-climax. In fact were there no question of taste involved, scarce a doubt would arise as to the Apostle’s meaning. Have we a right to adopt forced interpretations, to avoid a natural one, because it seems to us unrefined? As Lightfoot remarks “If it seems strange that St. Paul should have alluded to such a practice at all, it must be remembered that as this was a recognized form of heathen self-devotion, it could not possibly be shunned in conversation, and must at times have been mentioned by a Christian preacher. The remonstrance is doubly significant as addressed to Galatians, for Pessinus, one of their chief towns, was the home of the worship of Cybele, in honor of whom these mutilations were practiced.” Wordsworth: “There would be more hope from their ex-cision, than from their circumcision. For then they would be excluded from the Jewish congregation, they would feel the rigor of the law, they would be ashamed of enforcing it on you. Then there would be good hope, that they also would joyfully hail and accept the gracious liberty of the gospel, and would be joined as sound members to the Body of Christ.”—R.]—Ἀναστατοῦντες, unsettling=to bring into tumult, stronger than ταράσσειν. Wieseler: To render seditious, namely, against the order of Christianity, or rather against its Lord and King, Christ.—[Chrysostom: “Well does he say ἀναστατοῦντες, for abandoning their country and their freedom and their kindred in heaven, they compelled them to seek a foreign and a strange land; banishing from the heavenly Jerusalem and the free, and forcing them to wander about as captives and aliens.” (From Lightfoot.)—R.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Christian Liberty. Respecting the idea of Freedom, which Paul in this Epistle maintains and vindicates for Christians with such decision (from Gal_3:25 on, substantially this, but more on its negative side; in express words in this section), we are to consider that it does not primarily mean freedom from the accusations and the curse of the law (wrath of God, etc.), but, agreeably to the whole polemics of the Apostle, means freedom from the claims (requirements) of the law, from the obligation of attaching ourselves to it, in order by works of the law to seek salvation (to seek it through these conjointly with faith, yes, essentially to seek it through these). Too precipitately and too prevailingly does Luther, for example, take this freedom, which Christ has won, in the former sense, and in this sense eulogizes it as the most precious benefit. Undoubtedly, however, freedom in this sense stands causally connected with freedom in the other; in the first place by the very fact that only he who through Christ is delivered from the curse of the law, is a Christian, and only to him does freedom from the law itself accrue (although strictly speaking this does not belong here);—and secondly, inasmuch as only to him who does not give himself any more into bondage under the law, does freedom from its curse also remain assured, while conversely, whoever gives up the other freedom, loses also this, and thus comes into double bondage. Hence it is fully admissible to comprehend in the freedom which Paul claims for the Christian, his freedom from the curse of the law—not exegetically it is true, but at least in the practical application of the doctrine. Still more; in the reference to freedom from the curse of the law (wrath of God), an entirely just apprehension of the doctrine is involved, since Paul contends with such earnestness for the freedom of the Christians from the law, and against the imposing of the law upon them, and thus against their being brought upon the ground of the righteousness of works, for this very reason, that thereby we forfeit also our freedom from the curse of the law, and so come under this curse, losing thereby the advantage that we have in Christ, the certainty of the grace of God. His strong emphasizing of the freedom of Christians has its ground indeed not merely in an abstract pride of freedom, leading him to feel: Christians now have no longer need of allowing themselves to be held in bondage by a law, but it is grounded in the doctrinal knowledge of the loss of salvation, which would result from the giving up of that freedom.

2. Either the law wholly, or not at all; either Christ or the law. The Apostle presents two momentous alternatives and thereby sets himself against all half courses and their self-deceiving effect. The first is: “Either the law wholly—or not at all.” Whoever once places himself in one particular on the legal ground, cannot stop short with that one. For in the first place the law, although a whole consisting of many members, is yet a whole in which one member depends on another. And secondly for this very reason the blessing of God is not promised to the observance of one or the other part of it, but only to the observance of the whole; whoever therefore will become partaker of the blessing in the way of law, must observe the whole law. But if he shrinks from undertaking the whole, either because he recognizes much of it as abolished for the Christian, or because much of it is burdensome to him, or as he thinks of the impossibility of fulfilling all aright, and of the curse which is denounced against all short comings, then let him give up the legal position altogether. This suggests then the other alternative: “Either Christ or the law,” The two “do not match,” i. e. whoever will be justified by works of law, thereby renounces virtually, and ought therefore to renounce formally the consolations of grace in Christ; for in so doing he does not seek his righteousness in Christ, but rejects Him. Commonly however man would be glad to take the latter with the former, would at least, without building upon it, be well content with the free grace of God, as the complement of his imperfect righteousness of works; but in vain—the sentence is: Fallen away from grace!—“This text, Gal_5:2; Gal_5:4, is a true touchstone, by which we may securely and certainly judge all manner of doctrines, works and ceremonies of all men. Whoever now, be they Papists, Turks, Jews, sectaries,—or whoever they may be, teach, that anything is necessary to salvation besides faith in Christ, they hear in this place the sentence of the Holy Ghost pronounced against them by the Apostle, namely, that Christ profiteth them nothing. But if St. Paul can venture to pass so terrible a judgment against the law and circumcision, which God Himself has given, what kind of judgment would he utter upon the chaff and the dross of men’s ordinances? Wherefore this text is such a thunderclap, that by right the whole papal realm should be astounded and terrified thereat.” Luther.

3. “Waiting for the hope of righteousness.” Justification, on one hand, is a benefit to be obtained even now, but on the other hand, that which we now obtain is not yet the whole, not yet the consummation. But the justification of the Christian in the present is not on this account in any way an illusion, nor is the joyful certainty, which faith has, of being justified in Christ, prejudiced. On the contrary the believer knows very well that at first he can only have this benefit in a measure corresponding to the imperfection of the present dispensation. The joyfulness of faith would be beclouded if the hope of consummation in eternity, in spite of all present imperfection, did not essentially appertain to faith, as certain hope. Hoping and waiting include, it is true, a negative element, a not yet having; but they also include essentially a positive element, the certainty that what is not yet possessed will nevertheless be attained, and this positive element is derived from nothing else than faith. Hope is grounded in faith—but never in our works; faith is therefore not only necessary in the beginning, but remains so perpetually; if we lose it, we lose hope also.

4. Faith, Hope, Love. Faith, that has hope, is the one thing that characterizes the Christian, to which is added Love. As in hope faith becomes a waiting faith, πίστις ἀπεκδεχομένη, so through love does it become an active faith, π. ἐνεργουμένη, i. e., the ἐνέργεια does not first through love come into faith, but rather faith manifests in this love its own indwelling energy; had it no such ἐνέργεια in itself, there would be no such result as love, and where this energy is wanting to it, because it is a mere nominal faith, there is no such result. Even so the capacity of waiting does first come into faith, not through hope, but on the contrary, because this inheres in faith, from faith emanates hope.—The Catholic doctrine of a fides caritate formata, as the condition of justification, has of course not the least support in this passage; for the simple reason that “working through love” affirms something enirely different: “non per caritatem formam suam accipere vel formari fidem, sed per caritatem operosam vel efficacem esse ap. docet.” Calovius. Nor can it be concluded from this passage that the Apostle would make love the principle of justification together with faith. See the Exegetical Notes above, but especially Luther, who has so truly apprehended the significance of our passage: “Paul treats not in this place of what Faith accomplishes before God, as how one becomes righteous before God; for this he has done at full length above; but he says just here at the end, as it were for a short conclusion, what is a true Christian life; in Christ such a faith alone avails, which is no feigned, hypocritical one, but a true living faith. Now such a faith is one that exercises itself and perseveres in good works through love. For this is nothing else than to say: Whoever will be a true Christian man and in Christ’s Kingdom, he must forsooth have a true faith. But now assuredly the faith is not sound, where the works of love do not follow after. Therewith he shuts out from the Kingdom of Christ all hypocrites, both on the right hand and on the left; on the right all Jews and work-saints, but on the left all slothful and secure folk, who say: If faith without works makes righteous, then God requires nothing of us than only that we believe, therefore we are permitted to do what we list.”

5. Love does not overlook perversion of doctrine. Certain as it is that faith, active through love, is part of the Christian life, yet over against those, who destroy faith by perversion of doctrine, indulgence for love’s sake, is not in place, but earnestness and severity (comp. the remarks of Luther upon this, in the Homiletical Notes, Gal_5:10).

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Gal_5:1. Luther:—Let us learn to count this our freedom, most noble, exalted and precious, which no emperor, no prophet, nor patriarch, no angel from heaven, but Christ, God’s Son, hath obtained for us; not for this, that He might relieve us from a bodily and temporal subjection, but from a spiritual and eternal imprisonment of the cruellest tyrants, namely, the law, sin, death, devil, &c.—Those that will be secure and snore on without care, these will not keep this freedom. For Satan is to the light of the Gospel hostile above measure, i. e., to the doctrine of grace, freedom, consolation and life. Therefore, where he is aware that it is about to dawn, he keeps no holiday, but sets himself speedily with all might against it. [Calvin:—He reminds them that they ought not to despise a freedom so precious. And certainly it is an invaluable blessing, in defence of which it is our duty to fight, even to death. If men lay upon our shoulders an unjust burden, it may be borne; but if they endeavor to bring our conscience into bondage, we must resist valiantly, even to death. If men be permitted to bind our consciences, we shall be deprived of an invaluable blessing, and an insult will be, at the same time, offered to Christ, the author of our freedom.—R.]

[Cowper:—This is a liberty unsung

By poets, and by senators unpraised;

Which monarchs cannot grant, nor all the powers

Of Earth and Hell confederate take away:

A liberty which persecution, frand,

Oppression, prisons, have no power to bind;

Which whoso tastes can be enslaved no more.

’Tis liberty of heart, derived from Heaven,

Bought with His blood who gave it to mankind.

* * * The oppressor holds

His body bound; but knows not what a range

His spirit takes, unconscious of a chain,

And that to bind him is a vain attempt,

Whom God delights in, and in whom He dwells.—R.]

Gal_5:2. Luther:—Under the sun there is no more hurtful or poisonous thing, than the doctrine of human laws and works, that, are received in the imagination of thereby obtaining forgiveness of sins. For they take away in one heap the truth of the gospel and Christ Himself.

Gal_5:3. “A debtor to do the whole law.” If we overlook this chance, and Moses begins in one particular to rule over us, we must thereafter be wholly and entirely subject to his power, whether we will or not. Therefore, to be brief, we cannot, yea, ought not, nor will not suffer, that any one should hang any one fraction of Moses’ law [Gesetzlein Mosis] upon our neck.

Gal_5:4. “Ye are separated from Christ.”—How could one speak more powerfully against the law? What can or will any one bring up against this mighty thunderclap? It is not possible that the gospel and the law can dwell and rule in one heart at the same time with one another, but of necessity either Christ must yield to the law or the law to Christ. Therefore, when thou fanciest that Christ and confidence in the law might dwell together with one another in thy heart, thou art of a certainty to believe and know, that in thy heart not Christ, but the very devil dwells and keeps house, who under the form of Christ accuses and terrifies thee, and demands that thou through the law and thine own works shouldst make thyself righteous; for the true Christ has not that way.—Even as one that falls out of a ship, let it happen as it may, must certainly drown in the sea; even so can it not be otherwise than that whoever falls away from grace, must be condemned and lost.—If those fall away from Grace, that will be justified by the law of God, beloved, whither will those fall that will be justified through human ordinances, their vows and merits? Into the deep abyss of hell, to the devil.

Gal_5:5. Spener:—Faith is not merely the beginning of our salvation, so that we must receive the first grace from God, and afterwards earn the rest ourselves, but all remaining gifts of grace and glory are alone expected and bestowed from faith.—Luther:—This is an admirable, noble consolation, wherewith all wretched, perplexed hearts, that feel their sin and are terrified thereat, are mightily holpen against all the fiery darts of the devil. For when the conscience has to wrestle and strive in such distress and perplexity, it becomes terrified and anxious, and the feeling of sin, of God’s wrath and of death is so great that it seems as if there were neither righteousness nor salvation to hope for. Then is it time to say: Dear brother, thou wouldst be glad to have such a righteousness, as might be felt, whereof thou mightest have joy and comfort, even as sin lets itself be felt and stirs up terror and despond; now that cannot be done, but do thou labor on, that the righteousness, which thou hast in hope, and which is yet hidden, may surpass the sin which thou feelest; and know, that it is not such a righteousness as lets itself be seen or felt, but as to which one must hope that in is time it will be reached. Therefore thou art not to judge after the feeling of sin, but according to the promise and doctrine of faith, through which Christ is promised to thee, that he may be thy perfect and everlasting righteousness.—Starke:—Waiting comprehends in it; a believing assurance of certain attainment of the thing hoped for, a high estimation of the j same, a continual remembrance thereof, an ardent longing thereafter, a joy in the apprehension of future felicity, a patient expectation, an abstinence from all that stands opposed to the purity and steadfastness of such hope.—Those that will be righteous by the law have nothing more to expect of Christ but believers have yet glorious benefits to hope from him.

Gal_5:6. Luther:—St. Paul points out here what is the fashion of the Christian life, namely, that it is nothing else than, inwardly, faith towards God and, outwardly, love and works towards our neighbor, so mat a man becomes perfectly a Christian, inwardly by faith towards God, who does not need our works, and outwardly by works towards men, whom our faith can help nothing, but our works and our love.—Of faith, what it is, what its inward hidden nature, power, work and office is, has he treated above, where he says that faith makes us righteous before God. But here he conjoins it with love and works, i. e. he speaks of its works and office, which it outwardly and publicly accomplishes, that it is the stirrer up to good works and to love, yea not alone the stirrer up, but the true doer and workmaster of all good works.—There stands St. Paul and says outright, that faith, which worketh by love, makes a Christian, says not that cowls, fasts, distinct attire or genuflections make a Christian.—Anything else, be it called what it may, makes no one a Christian: only faith and love do so. See also above in the Doctrinal Notes.

Gal_5:7. In Starke:—Running in religion is good, running well still better, to accomplish the race best of all. To a Christian life there appertains standing and walking: standing, that one may not fall, walking, that one may not stand still, which is commonly linked with a going back.—Luther:—These words are very comforting, for Christians have ever this temptation, to imagine that their life is an idle and sleepy matter, it seems more a creeping than a running. But so far as they remain steadfast in the wholesome doctrine, walk in the Spirit and wait on their vocation, they should in no wise trouble themselves, although it seems as if their work and doing went slowly on, and crept rather than walked. But our master, God, judges far otherwise. What seems to us slow walking, seems to Him quick and swift running, item, what we count for mournfulness, suffering, death etc., that is with Him joy, laughing and blessedness.—“Who did hinder you?” And now they supposed, forsooth, that all their matters were going most prosperously and most swiftly along.—Hedinger:—Have a care, pilgrim! on the way to heaven there are many stumbling blocks.—Hearest thou the sirens sing and the robbers whistle? Finish thou thy course with joy, let not the threatening and flattering of the world lead thee astray! The Lord is with thee!—Lange:—Beware of all credulousness, especially in spiritual things, which concern the well-being of the soul! Let a doctrine wear ever so good a guise, it must nevertheless be tested by God’s word.

Gal_5:8. Luther:—The devil is a prince of persuaders. He can so blow up and magnify the very smallest sins, that he who is tempted, thinks nothing else than that they are so great and terrible sins, as are worthy the punishment of eternal death. Then is it high time that we comfort such a disturbed soul in such wise as St. Paul has here done, saying to it, that such persuasion is not of Christ, since it gainsays the word of the gospel, which depicts Christ to us, not as an accuser, but as meek and compassionate, a Saviour and Comforter.

Gal_5:9. Hedinger:—The least particle of evil infects, a single spark kindles a forest. Away with it! But O ye careless! is it a small thing to you, to be corrupted through idle talk and companyings, through poison of lies against Christ?

Gal_5:10. Luther:—Has St. Paul done right in saying: I have a good confidence towards you, while yet the Holy Scripture forbids that we should have confidence in man? Answer: Faith and Love both believe, yet is the belief of the two not directed upon one thing. The faith is directed towards God, therefore it cannot be deceived: but love believes man, therefore is it often and greatly deceived. But yet the faith that love has is such a needful thing in this present life, that without it this life cannot at all continue. For if no man trusts nor believes another, what would this life upon earth become? Christians out of love believe people easier than the subtle children of the world are wont to do. For that believers trust people and expect good of them, that is beautiful fruit of the Holy Ghost and faith. But the Christian adds: In the Lord=so far do I trust you and expect good of you, as the Lord is in you and ye in Him, that is, so far as ye abide in the truth.—We must diligently distinguish doctrine from life. Doctrine is heaven, life the earth. In life there is sin, error, discord. Here love should pass by and overlook, should forbear; here should forgiveness of sins bear sway, yet so that one should not wish to uphold such sin and error. But with doctrine it is quite another thing, for it is holy, pure, ummixed, heavenly, divine; therefore can we not suffer it, that any one should distort it even in the least particular. Whoever will alter or adulterate it, against such a one there is neither love nor compassion.

Gal_5:11. St. Paul holds that for a certain sign, that it is not and cannot be the true gospel, if it is preached in peace and in quietness and is not gainsayed nor persecuted. On the other hand, the world, when it sees that from the preaching of the gospel great rumors, divisions, scandal and tumults follow, holds that for a certain size that such teaching is heretical and seditious.—To murderers, thieves and other evil-doers grace is shown; on the contrary the world deems that no more evil, mischievous people are to be found than Christians; therefore it also persuades itself that they can never have punishment and torment enough inflicted on them.—As long as persecutions and suffering endure, the state of the church is good. The church must suffer persecution, if the gospel is purely preached. For the gospel goes about to preach alone God’s compassion, grace, glory and praise, and on the other hand discovers the devil’s craft and malice. Where the gospel comes it cannot be otherwise, there must follow the scandal of the cross; where that does not come to pass, there certainly the devil is not yet fairly hit, but only a little grazed.—May God be surety that the offence of the cross do not cease, which would soon come to pass, if we only preached, what the prince of this world with his members would be glad to hear, namely, how to be justified and saved by one’s own works. [The offence of the cross. 1. It asks men to humble their pride and take salvation as a free gift; this is a great scandal. 2. It sometimes seems to cease: 3. It never does.—R.] The homiletical uses of the single verses, especially 1–9, are easily suggested by the sententious character of the greater part.

Gal_5:1-6 From Lisco:—The care taken by the Christian, to stand fast in the true freedom.

Gal_5:7-12. How are we to rescue those who stand in danger of apostacy? 1. By bringing to their minds their earlier life in communion with God: 2. by warning against the destruction to which they are hastening, Gal_5:9-10; Galatians 3. by the testimony of our own walk and perseverance in fellowship with God through Christ, Gal_5:11. For Gal_5:1-6 at New Year. Frantz:—A good counsel at the New Year for all, who will strengthen their inward life: 1. Stand fast in the freedom, wherewith Christ hath made us free; 2. lose not Christ and fall not away from grace; 3. wait in the Spirit through faith for the righteousness that is to be hoped for; 4. walk in faith which worketh by love.

Footnotes:

[11][Wordsworth finds here a reference to the false accusation (Gal_5:11) that he preached circumcision, and Lightfoot thinks this is probably an indirect refutation of calumnies as well as an assertion of authority.—R.]

[12][Lightfoot renders “are driven forth, are banished with Hagar your mother,” but white this meaning of ἐκπίπτειν is classical, it is not found elsewhere in New Testament and must not be pressed.—R.]

[13][The verb here used means “to break up a road,” so as to render it impassable. It originally took the dative of the person, but in the New Testament is followed by an accusative. Lightfoot seems to think ἀνέκοψεν (Rec.) would suit the metaphor of the stadium better, its meaning being “to beat back,” to hinder with the further idea of thrusting back (Ellicott), but the other reading is too well supported, he also remarks that the transcribers seem to have taken offence at the word ἐγκόπτειν, since it is frequently altered, e. g. 1Th_2:18; Act_24:4.—R.]

[41] Gal_4:31.—א. διό. [So B. D1. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Ellicott, Alford, Lightfoot. Ἄρα (Rec.) is feebly supported; as also ἡμεῖς δέ.—R.]

[42] Gal_5:1.—The correct reading is probably that of Lachmann: τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσεν· στήκετε οὖν. So א. which also begins Galatians 5 with στήκετε. [This reading is supported also by A. B. C. D., and adopted by Usteri, Meyer (4th ed., Schmoller mentions the other reading as his) and Alford. Τῇ ἐλευθεριᾳ, ᾖ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσεν, στήκετε οὖν is supported by D.2 3 E. K. L., the great majority of cursives, many versions and fathers, and is adopted by Griesbach, Rückert, Tischendorf, Wieseler, Ellicott, Wordsworth, Lightfoot (who differs in punctuation however), Between these two readings the choice is very difficult. The authorities are so equally divided, and as the verbal difference is slight, the critical question resolves itself into this delicate one: whether the transcriber was more likely to have omitted or inserted ᾖ, because of ἡμᾶς immediately following. Meyer thinks it was inserted, others that it was omitted. The latter opinion seems more probable, and the second reading is preferable on diplomatic grounds. The renderings given above are in accordance with the two readings, but minor variations in interpretation are noticed in the Exeg. Notes.

We find besides, οὖν placed after ἐλευθερίᾳ, but this is feebly supported; it is put after στήκετε in א. A.B.C.F. On this position of the particle, an argument for Lachmann’s punctuation is based, though it is not decisive. Χριστός is placed before ἡμᾶς in C.K.L.: after it in א. A. B. D. E. F. G.

Lightfoot not only begins a new sentence at δτήκετε, but, retaining ᾖ, is forced to join the first clause directly with Gal 5:31, and to render: we are sons “of her who is free with that freedom which Christ has given us.” So Schott and Rinck. This seems forced, but Lightfoot’s note on the various readings is valuable.—On the other variations from the E. V., in this verse, see Exeg. Notes.—R.]

[43] Gal_5:2.—א. omits Παῦλος, inserted however by the corrector.

[44] Gal_5:2.—[Both here and in Gal_5:3, the reference is not to the fact of having been circumcised, but now resorting to the rite as necessary.—R.]

[45] Gal_5:4.—[Schmoller renders: abgetrennt seid ihr von (der gemeinschaft mit) Christo. The construction is pregnant, and scarcely admits of a literal translation. Vulgate: evacuati estis a. Alford’s “annihilates from Christ” is objectionable. Ellicott’s paraphrase is good: “Your union with Christ became void” (so Meyer). It seems both more lively and more exact to retain the present in English, since “the aorists (κατηργήθητε, ἐξεπέσατε) represent the consequences as instantaneous” (Lightfoot).—R.]

[46] Gal_5:5.—א. has ἐκδεχόμεθα, א.3 ἀπεκδεχόμεθα.

[47] Gal_5:7.—[Rec. has ἀνέκοψε, but the correct reading is ἐνέκοψε (all MSS., most cursives, and modern editors).—R.]

[48] Gal_5:7.—Τῇ ἀληθείαμὴ πείθεσθαι is, without ground, deemed spurious by Semler and Kopp. [א. A. B. Lachmann, Lightfoot, omit τῇ; retained on good authority by Tischendorf, Meyer, Ellicott.—R.]

[49] Gal_5:9.—Δολοῖ is a gloss.

[50] Gal_5:12.—[See Exeg. Notes, on the meaning of this verse.—R.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal 4:31.[43] Τῆς ἐλευθέρας, of the free) In the liberty follows. An Anadiplosis.[44]

[43] Οὐκ ἐσμὲν, we are not, i.e. we neither ought nor wish to be.—V. g.

[44] See App. The repetition of the same word in the end of the preceding and in the beginning of the following member. Here the τῆς ἐλευθέρας at the end of this ver., and the conjugate word Τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ at the beginning of ch. Gal 5:1, constitutes the Anadiplosis.—ED.

—————

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal_4:31 is usually looked upon as the keystone, as the final result of the previous discourse. Applicat historiam et allegoriam, et summam absolvit brevi conclusione, Luther, 1519. But so taken, the purport of Gal_4:31 appears to express far too little, and to be feeble, because it has been already more than once implied in what precedes (see Gal_4:26; Gal_4:28). We do not get rid of this incongruity, even if with Rückert we prefer the reading ἡμεῖς δέ, also approved by Hofmann (see the crit. notes), and assume the tacit inference: consequently the inheritance cannot escape us, expulsion does not affect us. For, after the whole argument previously developed, any such express application of Gal_4:30 to Christians would have been entirely superfluous; no reader needed it, in order clearly to discern and deeply to feel the certainty of victory conveyed in Gal_4:30; hence Gal_4:31 would be halting and without force. No; Gal_4:31 begins a new section. Comp. Lachmann, de Wette, Ewald, Hofmann. The allegorical instruction, which from Gal_4:22 onwards Paul has given, comes to a close forcibly and appropriately with the triumphant language of Scripture in Gal_4:30; and now Paul will follow it up by the exhortation to stand fast in their Christian liberty (Gal_5:1). But first of all, as a basis for this exhortation, he prefixes to it the propositionresulting from the previous instructionwhich forms the pith of the allegory (Holsten), and exactly as such is fitted to be the theoretical principle placed at the head of the practical course of action to be required in the sequel, Gal_4:31. This proposition is then followed by τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσεν, Gal_5:1, which very forcibly serves as a medium of transition to the direct summons στήκετε οὖν. Therefore, brethren,seeing that our position is such as results from this allegory,we are not children of a bond-woman (like the Jews), but of the free woman; for freedom Christ has made us free: stand therefore fast, etc.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gal 4:31 . The preceding allegory has illustrated the essential difference between the heritage of Jews and Christians. Whereas Jews inherit bondage to Law, freedom is the Christian birthright, derived from their heavenly mother. The Apostle now proceeds to enforce the truth that Christ bestowed this freedom upon us, and that it is an essential principle of our call.

Gal 4:31 to Gal 5:12 . Freedom is our birthright in Christ and an essential condition of our call. Accordingly the Apostle protests against the claim that all Christians should be circumcised, as a departure from the spirit of Christ, a dangerous innovation which the churches will certainly condemn, and a superstition of the flesh on a par with the grossest heathen superstitions.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The conclusion of the former allegory, that we by no means procure and call back again the slavery of the Law, seeing that the children of the bondmaid shall not be heirs.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

So then--The oldest manuscripts read, "Wherefore." This is the conclusion inferred from what precedes. In Gal 3:29 and Gal 4:7, it was established that we, New Testament believers, are "heirs." If, then, we are heirs, "we are not children of the bond woman (whose son, according to Scripture, was 'not to be heir,' Gal 4:30), but of the free woman (whose son was, according to Scripture, to be heir). For we are not "cast out" as Ishmael, but accepted as sons and heirs.

Next: Galatians Chapter 5

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 31. So then] We-Jews and Gentiles, who believe on the Lord Jesus, are not children of the bond woman-are not in subjection to the Jewish law, but of the free; and, consequently, are delivered from all its bondage, obligation, and curse.

Thus the apostle, from their own Scripture, explained by their own allegory, proves that it is only by Jesus Christ that they can have redemption; and because they have not believed in him, therefore they continue to be in bondage; and that shortly God will deliver them up into a long and grievous captivity: for we may naturally suppose that the apostle has reference to what had been so often foretold by the prophets, and confirmed by Jesus Christ himself; and this was the strongest argument he could use, to show the Galatians their folly and their danger in submitting again to the bondage from which they had escaped, and exposing themselves to the most dreadful calamities of an earthly kind, as well as to the final ruin of their souls. They desired to be under the law; then they must take all the consequences; and these the apostle sets fairly before them.

1. WE sometimes pity the Jews, who continue to reject the Gospel. Many who do so have no pity for themselves; for is not the state of a Jew, who systematically rejects Christ, because he does not believe him to be the promised Messiah, infinitely better than his, who, believing every thing that the Scripture teaches concerning Christ, lives under the power and guilt of sin? If the Jews be in a state of nonage, because they believe not the doctrines of Christianity, he is in a worse state than that of infancy who is not born again by the power of the Holy Ghost. Reader, whosoever thou art, lay this to heart.

2. The 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th verses of this chapter (Ga 4:4-7) contain the sum and marrow of Christian divinity.

(1.) The determination of God to redeem the world by the incarnation of his Son.

(2.) The manifestation of this Son in the fulness of time.

(3.) The circumstances in which this Son appeared: sent forth; made of a woman; made under the law; to be a sufferer; and to die as a sacrifice.

(4.) The redemption of the world, by the death of Christ: he came to redeem them that were under the law, who were condemned and cursed by it.

(5.) By the redemption price he purchases sonship or adoption for mankind.

(6.) He, God the Father, sends the Spirit, God the Holy Ghost, of God the Son, into the hearts of believers, by which they, through the full confidence of their adoption, call him their Father.

(7.) Being made children, they become heirs, and God is their portion throughout eternity. Thus, in a few words, the whole doctrine of grace is contained, and an astonishing display made of the unutterable mercy of God. See the notes on these verses (Gal 4:4-7).

3. While the Jews were rejecting the easy yoke of Christ, they were painfully observing days, and months, and times and years. Superstition has far more labour to perform than true religion has; and at last profits nothing! Most men, either from false views of religion, or through the power and prevalency of their own evil passions and habits, have ten thousand times more trouble to get to hell, than the followers of God have to get to heaven.

4. Even in the perverted Galatians the apostle finds some good; and he mentions with great feeling those amiable qualities which they once possessed. The only way to encourage men to seek farther good is to show them what they have got, and to make this a reason why they should seek more. He who wishes to do good to men, and is constantly dwelling on their bad qualities and graceless state, either irritates or drives them to despair. There is, perhaps, no sinner on this side perdition who has not something good in him. Mention the good-it is God's work; and show what a pity it is that he should not have more, and how ready God is to supply all his wants through Christ Jesus. This plan should especially be used in addressing Christian societies, and particularly those which are in a declining state.

5. The Galatians were once the firm friends of the apostle, and loved him so well that they would have even plucked out their eyes for him; and yet these very people cast him off, and counted and treated him as an enemy! O sad fickleness of human nature! O uncertainty of human friendships! An undesigned word, or look, or action, becomes the reason to a fickle heart why it should divest itself of the spirit of friendship; and he who was as dear to them as their own souls, is neglected and forgotten! Blessed God! hast thou not said that there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother? Where is he? Can such a one be trusted long on this unkindly earth? He is fit for the society of angels and the spirits of just men made perfect; and thou takest him in mercy lest he should lose his friendly heart, or lest his own heart should be broken in losing that of his friend. Hasten, Lord, a more perfect state, where the spirit of thy own love in thy followers shall expand, without control or hinderance, throughout eternity! Amen.

6. On allegorizing, in explaining the word of God, something has already been said, under Ga 4:24; but on the subject of allegory in general much might be said. The very learned and accurate critic, Dr. Lowth, in his work, De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, has entered at large into the subject of allegory, as existing in the sacred writings, in which he has discovered three species of this rhetorical figure.

1. That which rhetoricians term a continued metaphor. See Solomon's portraiture of old age, Ec 12:2-6.

2. A second kind of allegory is that which, in a more proper and restricted sense, may be called parable. See Matthew 13, and the note on "Mt 13:3", &c.

3. The third species of allegory is that in which a double meaning is couched under the same words. These are called mystical allegories, and the two meanings are termed the literal and mystical senses.

For examples of all these kinds I must refer to the learned prelate above named.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

31. So then, brethren. He now exhorts the Galatians to prefer the condition of the children of Sarah to that of the children of Hagar; and having reminded them that, by the grace of Christ, they were born to freedom, he desires them to continue in the same condition. If we shall call the Papists, Ishmaelites and Hagarites, and boast that we are the lawful children, they will smile at us; but if the two subjects in dispute be fairly compared, the most ignorant person will be at no loss to decide.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

31. So then] Better, wherefore. The conclusion is drawn from the whole preceding argument. It is the assertion of our liberty in the Gospel of Christ—freedom from the curse of the law, from the yoke of ritual observances, from the bondage of sin and Satan, from the burden of an evil conscience—an earnest of “the glorious liberty of the children of God”.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

Ver. 31. We are not children, &c.] q.d. We are in a far better condition than legalists. "I have blessed Ishmael," saith God; "twelve princes shall he beget; but my covenant will I establish with Isaac," Gen 17:20-21. And such honour have all his saints.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then, brethren - It follows from all this. Not from the allegory regarded as an argument - for Paul does not use it thus - but from the considerations suggested on the whole subject. Since the Christian religion is so superior to the Jewish; since we are by it freed from degrading servitude, and are not in bondage to rites and ceremonies; since it was designed to make us truly free, and since by that religion we are admitted to the privileges of sons, and are no longer under laws, and tutors, and governors, as if we were minors; from all this it follows, that we should feel and act, not as if we were children of a bondwoman, and born in slavery, but as if we were children of a freewoman, and born to liberty. It is the birthright of Christians to think, and feel, and act like freemen, and they should not allow themselves to become the slaves of customs, and rites, and ceremonies, but should feel that they are the adopted children of God.

Thus closes this celebrated allegory - an allegory that has greatly perplexed most expositors, and most readers of the Bible. In view of it, and of the exposition above, there are a few remarks which may not inappropriately be made.

(1) It is by no means affirmed, that the history of Hagar and Sarah in Genesis, had any original reference to the gospel. The account there is a plain historical narrative, not designed to have any such reference.

(2) The narrative contains important principles, that may be used as illustrating truth, and is so used by the apostle Paul. There are parallel points between the history and the truths of religion, where the one may be illustrated by the other.

(3) The apostle does not use it at all in the way of argument, or as if that proved that the Galatians were not to submit to the Jewish rites and customs. It is an illustration of the comparative nature of servitude and freedom, and would, therefore, illustrate the difference between a servile compliance with Jewish rites, and the freedom of the gospel.

(4) This use of an historical fact by the apostle does not make it proper for us to turn the Old Testament into allegory, or even to make a very free use of this mode of illustrating truth. That an allegory may be used sometimes with advantage, no one can doubt while the “Pilgrim’s Progress” shall exist. Nor can anyone doubt that Paul has here derived, in this manner, an important and striking illustration of truth from the Old Testament. But no one acquainted with the history of interpretation can doubt that vast injury has been done by a fanciful mode of explaining the Old Testament; by making every fact in its history an allegory; and every pin and pillar of the tabernacle and the temple a type. Nothing is better suited to bring the whole science of interpretation into contempt; nothing dishonors the Bible more, than to make it a book of enigmas, and religion to consist in puerile conceits. The Bible is a book of sense; and all the doctrines essential to salvation are plainly revealed. It should be interpreted, not by mere conceit and by fancy, but by the sober laws according to which are interpreted other books. It should be explained, not under the influence of a vivid imagination, but under the influence of a heart imbued with a love of truth, and by an understanding disciplined to investigate the meaning of words and phrases, and capable of rendering a reason for the interpretation which is proposed. People may abundantly use the facts in the Old Testament to illustrate human nature, as Paul did; but far distant be the day, when the principles of Origen and of Cocceius shall again prevail, and when it shall be assumed, that “the Bible means every thing that it can be made to mean.”

(These are excellent remarks, and the caution which the author gives against extravagant and imaginative systems of interpreting scripture cannot be too often repeated. It is allowed, however, nearly on all hands, that this allegory is brought forward by way of illustration only, and not of argument. This being the case, the question, as to whether the history in Genesis were originally intended represent the matter, to which Paul here applies it, is certainly not of very great importance, notwithstanding the learned labor that has been expended on it, and to such an extent as to justify the critic’s remark. “vexavit interprets vehementer vexatus ab iis et ipse.” Whatever be the original design of the passage, the apostle has employed it as an illustration of his subject, and was guided by the Spirit of inspiration in so doing. But certainly we should not be very far wrong, if since an apostle has affirmed such spiritual representation, we should suppose it originally intended by the Spirit; nor are we in great danger of making types of every pin and pillar, so long as we strictly confine ourselves to the admission of such only as rest upon apostolic authority. “This transaction,” says the eminently judicious Thomas Scott, “was so remarkable, the coincidence so exact, and the illustration so instructive, that we cannot doubt it originally was intended, by the Holy Spirit, as an allegory and type of those things to which the inspired apostle referred it.”)

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

The church of the Gentiles was not typified in Hagar, but in Sarah; from whence the scope of the apostle is to conclude, that we are not under the law, obliged to Judaical observances, but are freed from them, and are justified by faith in Christ alone, not by the works of the law. By this conclusion the apostle maketh way for the exhortation in the following chapter, pressing them to stand fast in their liberty.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

31. So then—Wherefore. That is, it results as an inference from all this that we, uncircumcised believers.

The bondwoman—In the Greek the article is significantly omitted from bondwoman, but inserted before free. There are many Churches in bondage, but there is but one Church free through Christ. The various false religions, even though they had not circumcision, had still severer rites, (see note Gal_5:12,) and quite as cumbrous rituals; Christianity is the free religion of the heart. Professor Lightfoot gives in illustration an allegory on the same passage of Old Testament history by the eminent Jewish theologian of Alexandria, the contemporary (though earlier) of Paul, Philo.

Philo makes the allegory illustrate the principle that divine wisdom, in order to be fruitful to the human soul, must be aided by human science; a true and valuable doctrine. Abraham is the human soul; he marries Sarah, whose name, signifying “princess,” shows that she represents divine wisdom; but the marriage is barren. Divine wisdom advises that he form connection with Hagar, who comes from Egypt, the land of science, and whose name—”sojourning”—indicates the human and transitory. Then, first, this marriage is fruitful, and the result is, that the barren becomes more prolific than the previously fruitful.

Professor Lightfoot shows several points in which Philo’s allegory is inferior; but one is most important of all; which is, that while Philo’s allegory is unbased, Paul’s is really contained in the history. The correspondences in Philo are imaginary, while in Paul they are real.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In the Greek text of this verse, taken in connection with the first of the next chapter, there is a great diversity of readings. The following are the forms in which it is presented by the principal editors:

(1) Textus Receptus:

Ara ajdelfoi oujk ejsmeskhv tekna ajllarav. Th ejleuqeria oun h Cristorwse, sthkete kai mhlin zugw douleiav ejneceqe.

(2) L. T. Tr., Meyer, Revisers, W. and H.: qerav. Th ejleuqeria hJmav Cristorwse, sthkete oun kai mh k.t.l..

(3) Ellicott: Dio, ajdelfoi oujk ejsmeskhv tekna ajllarav. Th ejleuqeria h hJmav Cristorwse sthkete oun kai k.t.l..

(4) Lightfoot: Dio ajdelfoi oujk ejsmeskhv tekna ajllarav th ejleuqeria h hJmav Cristorwse sthkete oun kai k.t.l..

The following are the probable translations of these several forms of the text:

(1) "Therefore, brethren, we are not a handmaid"s children, but children of the freewoman: stand fast then in or, "by," or, "to" the freedom with which Christ set us free; and do not again get held in a yoke of bondage.

(2) "Wherefore, brethren, we are not a handmaid"s children, but children of the freewoman: with freedom did Christ set us free; stand fast, then," etc.

(3) "Wherefore, brethren, we are not a handmaid"s children, but children of the freewoman; in the freedom with which Christ set us free stand fast, then, and," etc.

(4) "Wherefore, brethren, we are not a hand maid"s children, but children of the free woman by i.e. "by virtue of" the freedom or, "children of her who is free with that free dora" with which Christ set us free; stand fast, then, and," etc. It will be seen by the above that there appears a general agreement among recent editors of the Greek text upon three points:

(1) they all substitute dio for ara an alteration which makes no difference whatever in the sense;

(2) they expunge the oun after ejleuqeria;

(3) they insert oun after sthkete.

The forms (3) and (4) are identical except in the punctuation. The construction of the dative ejleuqeria with sthkete in forms (1) and (3) is difficult, and has not yet been quite satisfactorily accounted for. We miss the preposition ejn, to express the idea of immanence which is evidently intended, and to express which ejn is elsewhere found present; as 1Co_16:13; Php_1:27 4:1; 1Th_3:8. The arrangement given in form (3) is, in addition, greatly embarrassed by the "then" standing so far on in the sentence this particle marking, as it does, an inference from the sentence in the preceding verse. The furthest place in the sentence adduced by Winer ("Gram. N. T.," is the fourth word, in 1Co_8:4. The fourth form presents by far the easiest construction. It seems strange, however, if this was the original text, that it came to be changed into shapes so much more difficult to construe. In the second form, the clause, "with freedom did Christ set us free," seems somewhat strangely phrased; but this iteration of the idea of freedom, marking the apostle"s anxious insistance upon it, may have led the copyists to suspect an error of transcription, and thus have set them upon the endeavour to improve, as they thought, the text before them. The same anxious insistance upon an idea leads the apostle to a somewhat similar introduction of a clause which is almost a parenthesis, in Eph_2:5, "By grace have ye been saved." It will be noticed that the variations in the text above noted make not the smallest difference in the main contents of thought. The same factors of thought are present in all. The further remarks now to be made will assume for their basis the second form of the text. Wherefore, brethren, we are not a handmaid"s children, but children of the freewoman. This, dio (Receptus, ara) gathers up the result of the whole foregoing allegorical exposition, not that of its concluding portion only, as a basis for practical remark. "We are not a handmaid"s children;" that is, "It is not a slave-girl that is our mother." The article is wanting before paidiskhv, not because the apostle is thinking, as some imagine, of there being other handmaids besides Mosaism, as, for example, heathen ceremonialism; for the context points to only one slave-girl that can possibly answer to Hagar; but because he wishes by contrast to fasten attention upon the character of her who is our mother. Hence also there is no hJmeiv or uJmeiv, as in ver. 28. But children of the freewoman," or "of her who is free;" not defining what individual is our mother, but, who our mother is being now assumed as known, marking what her condition is. With freedom did Christ set us free (th ejleuqeria hJmav Cristorwse). "This clause both justifies and explains the word "freewoman." Our mother is a freewoman, because all her children have been emancipated by Christ; and the nature of her freedom is likewise defined by the nature of his work. This sense is more directly asserted in the fourth form of the Greek text of the freewoman by the freedom with which Christ set us free;" but it is in reality contained in the second. Christ"s emancipating work was twofold: he at once, by his atonement, effected our deliverance from guilt, and by the manner of his (Gal_3:13) disconnected his people from the ceremonial Law. The former aspect of his work is essential to the beneficial effect of the latter. The clear realization of the fact that he has effected our perfect reconciliation with God cuts up from its roots all desire even, that we should ourselves strive, either to make or to keep ourselves acceptable with God by obedience to a Law of positive ordinances; while we also must see that, as connected with a Crucified One, it is impossible that we can be in harmony with the Mosaic ritual. A desire to Judaize cannot eoexist with true faith in our crucified Redeemer. By affirming that Christ hath set us free, the apostle points, not merely to our release from real or fancied obligation to obey the Law of Moses, but also to our "joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have received reconciliation". (Rom_5:11) Stand fast, therefore. According to this reading, sthkete standing alone receives its colour of reference from the context. Socomai 2Th_2:15. Here it means the steadfast holding to a whole-hearted assurance that in Christ Jesus our freedom is complete. And do not again get held in a yoke of bondage. The verb ejne is used (Herod., 2:121) literally of being caught and held fast by a man-trap; also figuratively of being entangled with perplexities (ajporihsin, Herod., 1:190), with a curse, or with guilt, or with arbitrary dicta of a teacher (see Liddell and Scott). The condition of a slave is described by the word "yoke," 1Ti_6:1, Osoi eijsin uJpo zugon douloi, "As many as are bond-servants under the yoke." And it was probably with this particular shade of meaning that St. Peter used the term at the conference at Jerusalem respecting the ceremonial Law (Act_15:10) yoke which neither we nor our fathers had strength enough to bear;" referring to it, we may suppose, as slavery, not merely because obedience to it was difficult, but as being observed from a legalistic anxiety to approve one"s self thereby to the Divine acceptance or to escape the Divine displeasure. This view of the passage explains how the apostle was able to use the word "again" of these Galatian converts. They had been once under the yoke of an "evil conscience;" but Christ had come to them also, who were "afar off" in Gentile guiltiness, preaching peace, as he had come to them that were "nigh" in the Israelite covenant. (Eph_2:17) But if they could not have "peace" and "access to the Father" save through conformity with Mosaic eeremonialism, then their "freedom" was forfeited; they sank back again into their former state of bondage. But see also the note on ver. 9. This exhortation to "stand fast" presupposes that they had not yetlapsed, but were only in danger of it. (comp. the metatiqesqe of Gal_1:6)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

So then - To sum up all. We - Who believe. Are not children of the bondwoman - Have nothing to do with the servile Mosaic dispensation. But of the free - Being free from the curse and the bond of that law, and from the power of sin and Satan.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

VERSE 31. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

With this sentence the Apostle Paul concludes his allegory of the barren Church. This sentence forms a clear rejection of the righteousness of the Law and a confirmation of the doctrine of justification. In the next chapter Paul lays special stress upon the freedom which the children of the free woman enjoy. He treats of Christian liberty, the knowledge of which is very necessary. The liberty which Christ purchased for us is a bulwark to us in our battle against spiritual tyranny. Therefore we must carefully study this doctrine of Christian liberty, not only for the confirmation of the doctrine of justification, but also for the comfort and encouragement of those who are weak in faith.

Martin Luther — Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (1535), English translation by Theodore Graebner (Zondervan, 1939) — public domain (U.S. copyright not renewed). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Here the apostle draws a conclusion from the foregoing discourse, thus: "As Sarah cast out Hagar and Ishmael, so must the children of the New Jerusalem cast out the law, and all the legal rites, henceforth to be observed no more, either alone without Christ, or in conjunction with Christ. And as the church of the Gentiles was not typified in Hagar, but in Sarah, so we the Christian Gentiles are not obliged to judaical observances, but freed entirely by Christ from them, and justified by gospel grace without them."

The conclusion and sum of all is this, to bring off the Galatians from seeking justification by the works of the law, and to apprehend themselves no longer in bondage to circumcision and the Mosaic rites, but to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free: which introduces that excellent discourse to this purpose which we find contained in the next chapter.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of the handmaid, but of the free woman. [Tell me, ye who are so eager to return to the law, do ye not note what the law itself says? Of itself it warns you not to do this thing, in that it tells you the story of Abraham's two sons, one of whom, Ishmael, was the son of the bondwoman, Hagar; and the other of whom, Isaac, was the son of the freewoman, Sarah. These sons, it tells you, were born differently. Ishmael, the slave-born, came into the world according to the usual course of nature; but Isaac, the freeborn, came through the promise of God, which held good even contrary to the laws of nature. Now, this history, though literally true, is, nevertheless, so designed as to contain an allegory; for these two women represent the two covenants which we have been discussing. Hagar represents the law, which came from Mt. Sinai, and which, like Hagar, bears slave-born children. Hagar, then, in earlier history, represents Mt. Sinai in Arabia with its covenant, and in later history she stands for Jerusalem, the successor to Mt. Sinai, for she, like Hagar, is in bondage; and all her children are, as to sin and the law, slave-born ( Joh_8:32-34 ). Leaving out the preliminary steps, Paul rushes at once to the comparison of the two cities, for the emissaries of Jerusalem were constantly disparaging him as not the equal of those who were the heads of the church there ( Gal_2:6-7 ). Filling in all the steps, according to the analogy of the apostle's reasoning, the full allegory would run thus: Sarah, the freewoman, represents the gospel covenant, which, like Sarah, bears freeborn children according to God's promise, and she is now represented by the celestial Jerusalem, which, with her free children, is our mother. And the Scripture itself recognizes the order of these two covenants, showing how the law should be populous for a time, and then be excelled by the fecundity of the gospel covenant, which seemed so long barren; for Isaiah foretells it in the words, "Rejoice, etc." As for a time Hagar seemed to be the real wife, and as such to own the husband, so for centuries those of the old covenant seemed to be the real Bride and to own the Lord. Resuming the allegorical history and directly identifying the Christian with Isaac, Paul shows how the history continued to run parallel, for, as Ishmael persecuted Isaac, so the progeny of the law persecuted the children of the gospel. Then, prophetically conscious of God's design to continue the parallel to the end, he gives the final prophecy of the rejection of God's once chosen people, and closes with the incontrovertible conclusion that the Galatians are not children of the bondwoman, or law, but of the freewoman, or gospel. Thus Paul, knowing the passion of the Judaizers for allegorizing, meets them with their own weapon, and casts into this appropriate mold matter which he presents argumentatively and logically at Rom_9:6-9 ; and prophetically at Rom_11:15 . The fact that Isaac and the gospel were both matters of promise, forestalled the Judaizers in any attempt to adjust the allegory so as to turn it against Paul. Moreover, the Jews themselves universally recognized the law as a practical bondage ( Act_15:10 ; Mat_23:4 ), and the complaint against Paul was that he allowed too much liberty.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

31. So then, brethren. This, then, is the conclusion. We Christians are not children of the bondwoman, and are not under the bondage of the law. Dr. Schaff contrasts the two covenants as follows: Hagar and Ishmael —Judaism . Sarah and Isaac —Christianity . The Old Covenant The New Covenant The Law. The Gospel. Natural Birth. Spiritual Birth. Mount Sinai in Arabia. Mount Sion Above. The Earthly Jerusalem. The Heavenly Jerusalem. Bondage. Freedom. Persecuting. Persecuted. To be Cast Out and Off. Heirs of the Inheritance.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

31. διό. Always of practical result rather than argumentative inference (οὖν); a deduction from the preceding Gal 4:21-30, which must be carried out in daily life (thus forming the transition to the next section); we are therefore free.

ἀδελφοί. Once more, see Gal 4:28 note.

παιδίσκης, “a mere bondmaid.”

τῆς ἐλευθέρας. The absence of the article before παιδίσκης, and its insertion here, rhetorically direct attention (see Milligan on 1Th 4:8) and also suggest the unique character of the Jerusalem above, cf. Gal 1:10 (τὸν θεόν). This is our true and proper position, to be and behave as—children of the free!

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

31.] I am inclined to think, against Meyer, De W., Ellic., &c., that this verse is, as commonly taken, the conclusion from what has gone before: and that the διό is bound on to the κληρονομήσῃ preceding. For that we are κληρονόμοι, is an acknowledged fact, established before, ch. 3:29; ver. 7. And if we are, we are not the children of the handmaid, of whom it was said οὐ μὴ κληρονομ., but of the free-woman, of whose son the same words asserted that he should inherit. Observe in the first clause παιδίσκης is anarthrous: most likely because emphatically prefixed to its governing noun (cf. ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολος, Rom 11:13): but possibly, as indefinite, q. d. we are the children of no bondwoman, but of the freewoman. I prefer the former reason, as most consonant to N. T. diction. V.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

31. διό, ἀδελφοί, οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας. “Therefore, brethren, we are children not of a maid servant, but of the freewoman.” The omission of the article before παιδίσκης gives to the term a qualitative emphasis: “not of a slave woman”; while the article inserted before ἐλευθέρας makes this expression refer specifically to the free mother Sarah, and to that which in the allegorical interpretation corresponds to Sarah, the Christian community or church. Translated into terms more directly expressing the spiritual fact the sentence means that we who have faith belong not to a community or nation that is in bondage to the legal statutes (cf. vv. 1-10), but to that community of believers whose relation to God is that of sons, having the spirit of sonship, not of bondage (vv. 6, 7). Taken in its connection it constitutes a brief statement of the doctrine of the rejection of Israel according to the flesh which is expounded at length in Rom., chaps. 9-11. That the conclusion is derived from an allegorical argument in no way diminishes its value as a disclosure of Paul’s thought, the allegory being itself resorted to for the very purpose of presenting his thought more convincingly to his readers. Cf. on v. 21. The validity of the argument itself as a piece of exegesis depends, of course, upon the validity of the allegorical method in general and its applicability to this passage in particular. Its postulates are that the O. T. story of Isaac and Ishmael bears a meaning which is to be derived from it by reading it as an allegory, and that Isaac represents the spiritual seed of Abraham, viz., those who, by faith like Abraham’s, come into filial relation to God like that of free sons to a father, Ishmael standing for those whose relation to Abraham is simply that of natural descent. Whether Paul himself accepted these premises and ascribed a corresponding validity to his argument, or only meant by such an argument to bring his thought before his readers in a form which would appeal to them, is, as said above, not wholly clear. Presumably he did conceive that the argument had some real value; though in view of his use of scripture in general it can scarcely be doubted that it was for him not determinative of his view, but only confirmatory of an opinion reached in some other way. On παιδίσκη, cf. v. 22.

This verse is so evidently by its very terms—note παιδίσκης, ἐλευθέρας, etc., occurring in the preceding verses but not after this point—the conclusion of the allegorical argument introduced in v. 21, that it is surprising that it should ever have been thought of otherwise. So, e. g., Meyer. It is a matter of less consequence whether v. 31 is an inference from v. 30 or the summary of 21-30. But since from v. 30, even if the premise, “we as Christians correspond to Isaac” (cf. Sief.), be supplied, the natural conclusion is not “we are children of the free,” but, “we as children of the freewoman are heirs of the promise”; it is more probable that we should take this sentence as the summation of the whole allegorical argument (cf. the use of διό in 2Co 12:10, 1Th 5:11) and as expressing the thought which the apostle wished by this whole paragraph to impress upon the minds of the Galatians.

Cf. Confer, compare.

Lxx The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint. Quotations are from the edition of H. B. Swete. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1887-94.

B Burton, Ernest De Witt, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek. Third edition. Chicago, 1898.

Did. Διδαχὴ τῶν δώδεκα Ἀποστόλων. Various editions.

Sief. Sieffert, F. Galatien und seine ersten Christengemeinden, in Zeitschrift für nistorische Theologie., vol. XLI, 1871.

* Dem. 952:19: λάβε δή μοι καὶ τὸν τῆς προθεσμίας νόμον. Plato, Legg. XII 954 D: ἐὰν δὲ κατʼ οἰκίας ἐν ἄστει τέ τις χρῆται, τριετῆ τὴν προθεσμίαν εἷναι, ἐαν δὲ κατ· ἀγροὺς ἐν ἀφανεῖ κἐκτηται, δέκα ἐτῶν, ἐὰν δʼ ἐν ἀλλοδημίᾳ, τοῦ παντὸς χρόνου, οταν ανενρη πον, μηδεμίαν εἷναι προθεσμίαν τῆς ἐπιλήψεως.

*

Bruno und Sachau, Syr.-röm. Rechtsbuch, Leipzig, 1880. In the following translation courteously made from the Syriac text for this work by Professor Martin Sprengling, Ph.D., of the University of Chicago, επίτροπος and curator, have been retained as they stand transliterated in the Syriac text. The Syriac terms have been rendered literally because the English has but one term covering the functions of both classes of officers, viz., “guardian,” the use of which for both Syriac words would be confusing. “The law (νόμος) is asked: Can minors make a will (διαθήκας), and at what age can they do it? A girl up to twelve years is subject to the ἐπιτροπος, which, being translated, is the one in command, and can not write a will (διαθήκη). But when she has passed twelve years, she passes from subordination to the επιτροπος and comes to be under that of the curator, which, being translated, is examiner. And from the time when the girl is subject to the curator, she has authority to make a will (διαθηκη). Thus also a boy, until fourteen years, is under the authority of the ἐπιτροπος, and can not write a will (διαθήκη). But from fourteen years and upward he is under the authority of the curator and may write a will (διαθήκη), if he choose. But minors are under the authority of the curator up to twenty-five years; and from twenty-five years the boy is a perfect man and the girl a full woman. If a man die and leave children orphans, and make a will (διαθήκη) and appoint therein an ἐπίτροπος [or curator] for the orphans, they do not give security.

“Those who by will (διαθήκας) are appointed curators, the law (νόμος) provides that they shall not give security, because the owners of the property chose to establish them administrators.”

אԠא. Codex Sinaiticus. Fourth century. In Imperial Library, Petrograd. Edited by Tischendorf, 1862; photographic reproduction by H. and K. Lake, Oxford, 1911.

D D. Codex Claromontanus. Sixth century. In National Library, Paris. Greek-Latin. Edited by Tischendorf, 1852.

F F. Codex Augiensis. Ninth century. In Trinity College, Cambridge. Greek-Latin. Edited by Scrivener, 1859. Closely related to Codex Bærnerianus. See Gregory, Textkritik des Neuen Testaments, vol. II, Leipzig, 1902, pp. 113 f.

G G. Codex Bærnerianus. Ninth century. In Royal Library, Dresden. Greek-Latin. Edited by Matthæi, 1791; photographic reproduction issued by the Hiersemann publishing house, Leipzig, 1909.

A A. Codex Alexandrinus. Fifth century. In British Museum, London. Edited by Woide, 1786; N. T. portion by Cowper, 1860; Hansell, 1864; in photographic facsimile, by E. Maunde Thompson, 1879; and again in photographic simile by F. G. Kenyon in 1909.

B B. Codex Vaticanus. Fourth century. In Vatican Library, Rome. Photographic facsimile by Cozza-Luzi, 1889; and a second issued by the Hoepli publishing house, 1904.

C C. Codex Ephrœmi Rescriptus. Fifth century. In National Library, Paris. As its name implies, it is a palimpsest, the text of the Syrian Father Ephrem being written over the original biblical text. New Testament portion edited by Tischendorf, 1843. Contains Gal 1:21, ἔπειτα to the end, except that certain leaves are damaged on the edge, causing the loss of a few words. So e. g. ξῆλος or ξῆλοι, Gal 5:20.

Chrys. Joannes Chrysostomus. † 407. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 228.

Euthal. Euthalius. 459. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 230, and Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Thdrt. Theodoretus. † ca. 458. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 230; Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Bous. Bousset, Wilhelm, in Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments. Göttingen, 1907. 2te Aufl., 1908.

Wies. Wieseler, Karl, Commentar über den Brief Pauli an die Galater. Göttingen, 1859.

Th. Thayer, Joseph Henry, A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York, 1886. Rev. edition, 1889.

Ltft. Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions.

Kühner-Gerth Kühner, Raphael, Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. Dritte Auflage in neuer Bearbeitung, besorgt von Bernhard Gerth. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1898, 1904.

L.&S. Liddell, H. G., and Scott, R., Greek English Lexicon. Seventh edition revised. New York, 1882.

Ell. Ellicott, Charles John, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1854. Various subsequent editions.

JBL The Journal of Biblical Literature.

Encyc. Bib. Encyclopedia Biblica. Edited by T. K. Cheyne and J. S. Black. 4 vols. London, 1899-1903.

W. Winer, G. B., Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms. Various editions and translations.

Introd. Introduction.

Grot. Grotius, Hugo (Huig van Groot), Annotationes in Novum Testamentum. Paris, 1644. See Sanday, Wm., and Headlam, A. C.. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Edinburgh and New York, 1895. , p. civ.

Butt. Buttmann, A., A Grammar of the New Testament Greek. E. T. by J. H. Thayer. Andover, 1873.

M. and M. Moulton, J. H., and Milligan, G., Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament. 1914-.

Rob. Robertson, Archibald T., Grammar of the Greek New Testament. New York, 1914.

33 33 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. 17). Ninth or tenth century. In National Library, Paris. Called by Eichhorn “the queen of the cursives.” Cited by Tischendorf in Galatians more frequently than any other cursive. Contains the Prophets as well as Gospels, Acts, Cath. Epp. and Paul.

424 424 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. Paul 67). Eleventh century. In Vienna. It is in the corrections of the second hand (424:2) that the pre-Syrian element especially appears. See Westcott and Hort, [Westcott, B. F., and Hort, F. J. A., The New Testament in the original Greek. London, 1881. Vol. I, Text; vol. II, Introduction and Appendix.] Introd. § 212, p. 155.

442 442 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. 73). Thirteenth century. In Upsala.

Vg. Vulgate, text of the Latin Bible.

Dam. Joannes Damascenus. † ca. 756. See Sanday, Wm., and Headlam, A. C.. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Edinburgh and New York, 1895. , p. c.; Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Hier. Eusebius Hieronymus (Jerome). † 420. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 232, and Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Thphyl. Theophylactus. Ca. 1077.

Victorin. C. Marius Victorinus. Ca. 360 a.d. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 231; Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.;

Aug. Aurelius Augustinus. Ca. 394. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 232; Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Ambrst. Ambrosiaster. Ca. 305 a.d. See Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions., p. 232; Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

K K. Codex Mosquensis. Ninth century. In Moscow.

Mey. Meyer, Heinrich August Wilhelm, Kritisch-exegetisches Handbuch über den Brief an die Galater. Göttingen, 1841, in Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament, 1832-59. E. T., with bibliography, by Venables and Dickson. Edinburgh, 1873-85. Various later editions. See also under Sieffert, F. Galatien und seine ersten Christengemeinden, in Zeitschrift für nistorische Theologie., vol. XLI, 1871.

Wetst. Wetstein (or Wettstein), J. J., Novum Testamentum Græcum. Amsterdam, 1751, 1752.

WH. Westcott, B. F., and Hort, F. J. A., The New Testament in the original Greek. London, 1881. Vol. I, Text; vol. II, Introduction and Appendix.

RV. The Holy Bible, Revised Oxford, N.T., 1881, O.T.1884.

Tert. Tertullian. † ca. 223. See Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

P P. Codex Porphyrianus. Ninth century. In Imperial Library, Petrograd. Published by Tischendorf in Mon. Sac. Ined. Bd. V, 1865.

M Moulton, J. H., A Grammar of New Testament Greek. Vol. I. Prolegomena. Edinburgh, 1906.

* Against the strong evidence that Paul ascribed historicity to the O. T. narratives, including those here referred to, the word ἀλληγορούμενα can not be cited as valid evidence to the contrary. For though the word may often be used when the statements literally understood are regarded as not historically true. yet this is not involved in the meaning of the word. Cf. e. g., Origen. Cels. 4:44, where Origen, going beyond Paul and saying that the statements as originally uttered were allegorically spoken (ἠλληγόρηται), yet implies also their historicity in their literal sense. Philo, also, though he often rejects the literal meaning as absurd and false (Somn. I 102 [17]), yet in other instances clearly accepts as historically true in their literal sense passages which he also interprets allegorically. (Mut. nom. 81 [12]). Cf. Bous. Rel. d. Judent.2, p. 185, “Er [der tiefere, allegorische Sinn] tritt neben den andern [den Sinn des Wortlauts], nur in den selteneren Fällen hebt er ihn auf.”

31 31 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. 37) the so-called Leicester Codex. Fifteenth century. At Leicester, England. Described by J. Rendel Harris in The Origin of the Leicester Codex of the New Testament, London, 1887.

436 436 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. 80). Eleventh century. In the Vatican Library, Rome.

Ws. Weiss, Bernhard, Die paulinischen Briefe und der Hebräerbrief im berichtigten Text. Leipzig, 1896.

E E. Codex Sangermanensis. Ninth century. In Petrograd. Greek-Latin. A copy, not very good, of Codex Claromontanus. Hence not cited in the evidence.

Ltft. Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1865. 2d ed., revised, 1866. Various later editions.

Wies. Wieseler, Karl, Commentar über den Brief Pauli an die Galater. Göttingen, 1859.

Ell. Ellicott, Charles John, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. London, 1854. Various subsequent editions.

Sief. Sieffert, F. Galatien und seine ersten Christengemeinden, in Zeitschrift für nistorische Theologie., vol. XLI, 1871.

L.&S. Liddell, H. G., and Scott, R., Greek English Lexicon. Seventh edition revised. New York, 1882.

Bous. Bousset, Wilhelm, in Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments. Göttingen, 1907. 2te Aufl., 1908.

TR. Textus Receptus, the Greek text of the New Testament as commonly accepted from 1516 till the modern critical period.

Lxx The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint. Quotations are from the edition of H. B. Swete. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1887-94.

B B. Codex Vaticanus. Fourth century. In Vatican Library, Rome. Photographic facsimile by Cozza-Luzi, 1889; and a second issued by the Hoepli publishing house, 1904.

אԠא. Codex Sinaiticus. Fourth century. In Imperial Library, Petrograd. Edited by Tischendorf, 1862; photographic reproduction by H. and K. Lake, Oxford, 1911.

A A. Codex Alexandrinus. Fifth century. In British Museum, London. Edited by Woide, 1786; N. T. portion by Cowper, 1860; Hansell, 1864; in photographic facsimile, by E. Maunde Thompson, 1879; and again in photographic simile by F. G. Kenyon in 1909.

D D. Codex Claromontanus. Sixth century. In National Library, Paris. Greek-Latin. Edited by Tischendorf, 1852.

G G. Codex Bærnerianus. Ninth century. In Royal Library, Dresden. Greek-Latin. Edited by Matthæi, 1791; photographic reproduction issued by the Hiersemann publishing house, Leipzig, 1909.

33 33 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. 17). Ninth or tenth century. In National Library, Paris. Called by Eichhorn “the queen of the cursives.” Cited by Tischendorf in Galatians more frequently than any other cursive. Contains the Prophets as well as Gospels, Acts, Cath. Epp. and Paul.

424 424 (Tischendorf, Constantin, Novum Testamentum Grœce. Paul 67). Eleventh century. In Vienna. It is in the corrections of the second hand (424:2) that the pre-Syrian element especially appears. See Westcott and Hort, [Westcott, B. F., and Hort, F. J. A., The New Testament in the original Greek. London, 1881. Vol. I, Text; vol. II, Introduction and Appendix.] Introd. § 212, p. 155.

C C. Codex Ephrœmi Rescriptus. Fifth century. In National Library, Paris. As its name implies, it is a palimpsest, the text of the Syrian Father Ephrem being written over the original biblical text. New Testament portion edited by Tischendorf, 1843. Contains Gal 1:21, ἔπειτα to the end, except that certain leaves are damaged on the edge, causing the loss of a few words. So e. g. ξῆλος or ξῆλοι, Gal 5:20.

Cyr. Cyril of Alexandria. † 444. See Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines. Edited by Wm. Smith and Henry Wace. 4 vols. London 1877-87.

Cf. Confer, compare.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.