Galatians 4:9

Gal_4:9

But now, after that ye have known God.

Knowledge of God

That is not the best and truest knowledge of God which is wrought out by the labour and sweat of brain, but that which is kindled within us by a heavenly warmth in our hearts. As, in the natural body, it is the heart that sends up good blood and warm spirits into the head, whereby it is best enabled to perform its several functions; so that which enables us to know and understand aright in the things of God, must be a living principle of holiness within us. (John Smith.)

Gods knowledge of us

I. Its basis.

1. His omniscience.

2. His intimate connection with us through all the st.ages of our life.

(1) Physically.

(2) Spiritually: as our Maker, Preserver, Redeemer, Sanctifier.

II. Its wide embrace.

1. God knows every one of us

2. Our innermost thoughts.

3. Our secret wants.

4. Under all disguises:

5. In all circumstances.

Conclusion:

1. A warning to the sinner;

2. An encouragement to the believer.

However doubtful may be our estimate of ourselves or that of others, there is no doubt as to Gods estimate of us being the right one (T. T. Lynch.)

Weak and beggarly elements

I. Weak, because they have no power to rescue man from condemnation.

II. Beggarly, for they bring no rich endowments of spiritual treasures. A passionate and striking ritualism, expressing itself in bodily mortifications of the most terrible kind had been supplanted by the simple spiritual teaching of the gospel. For a time the pure morality and lofty sanctions of the new faith appealed not in vain to their higher instincts, but they soon began to yearn after a creed which suited their material cravings better, and was more allied to the systems they had abandoned. This end they attained by overlaying the simplicity of the gospel with Judaic observances. This new phase is ascribed to the temper which their old heathen education had fostered It was a return to the weak and beggarly elements which they had outgrown, a renewed subjection to the yoke of bondage which they had thrown off in Christ. They had escaped from one ritualistic system, only to bow before another. The innate failings of a race whom Caesar (Bell. Gall. 6:16) describes as excessive in its devotion to external observances was here reasserting itself. (Bishop Lightfoot.)

The use and abuse of ordinances

Ordinances may be considered three ways.

I. With Christ.

1. As types and figures of Christ to come.

2. As signs of grace of Divine institution.

II. Without Christ. As mere customs whether before or after Him.

III. Against Christ. As meritorious causes of salvation. (W. Perkins.)

The difficulty of not believing

I have been thinking how difficult it would be for us not to be Christians. It is hard, we say, to have faith; but do we realize what a task a man imposes upon himself if he attempts to live without faith? Is not some faith one of the first vital necessities of the human reason and heart? I wish, then, this morning, to invert a very common way of reasoning about religion among men. Instead of treating a religious faith as though it were a good thing to be added to a mans moral capital in life, I would raise the question rather, whether a man will have capital enough for life left if he lets a Christian faith go from him?

I. In order not to have faith, one must vacate a considerable portion of his own mental experience.

1. There is a large part of every mans self-conciousness which is bound up with faith in realities beyond this present world of sights and sounds. It would be almost an impossible task for us to disentangle all faith in things Divine and eternal from the elements of our self-consciousness. Our reasons have their roots in the Divine. If these primal beliefs in God and immortality were simply results of argument, we might reason ourselves out of them: but they are elements, rather, of our rational and conscious life, so that we cannot separate them wholly from ourselves. Atheists, after all, can only make believe not to believe.

2. There is another tremendously present thing which would have to be put away from us in order that we might be able to live without faith, and that is the Divine imperative of conscience. Something higher and better than we lays hold of us in conscience. There are several other vital elements which must be sacrificed in the vain effort to live without faith.

3. One will have to leave out some of the most marked experiences of his life. The simple fact is, that the invisible powers are constantly laying hold of the life of man in the world. It would be an impossible task for us to account wholly for our own lives simply and solely upon natural causes. Super-sensible influences do mingle and blend with the sensible; providences are realities of human experience.

4. There is another side of our experience, which I will just mention, from which one must cut himself loose, if he would have any success in not belonging to a Christian world; he must break off his fellowship with the truest and best life of humanity. The history of man is not merely, nor chiefly, political; it is religious. The history of the kingdom of redemption is the paramount part of human history. Other history, what we call profane history, is the form and shaping of events only; the substance of history is its spiritual progress; the issue of it, and the main thing in it all along, is redemption. If, then, one wants not to be a Christian believer, a citizen of a world becoming Christian, he will have to begin by denying himself a goodly fellowship.

II. Let us consider further how much one will have to believe in order not to be a christian, in relation to some particulars of the Christian life.

1. One vital element of the Christian life is trust in the goodness of the heavenly Father. We do not conceal from ourselves, we cannot, that this is a trust written often across the face of events in our lives which seem to contradict it. As Christians we believe in the sunny side, that is, in the Divine side, of everything. We say it is only our present position in the shadow, or under some cloud, which prevents our seeing the bright and eternal side of it. Wait, and we shall see the goodness of the Lord. We were sailing one afternoon with the broken coast of Maine in the distance projecting upon our horizon. A black thundercloud gathered in shore over the hill-tops. We could see the play of the lightnings, and the waters breaking from the cloud. That was all that the villagers and the fishermen along the shore could have seen. But we, at our distance, beheld also the untroubled sun in the clear sky above; its beams struck the edges of that heavy mass of vapours, and above the darkness and the lightnings we could see the upper side of the cloud turn to gold; and, even while it was blackness and fear to those below, its pinnacles and towers were shining before our eyes like the city of God descending from heaven. Thus Christian faith beholds also the heavenly side of this worlds storm and darkness.

2. Take as another instance the Christian belief in our personal sinfulness and need of forgiveness. How many thoughts of the heart must one forget not to believe that? I pass to two other examples.

3. Men say it is hard to believe in an atonement. Perhaps it may be in some of our human philosophies of Gods method of reconciling the world; but not to believe in Jesus word that the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sin, would require us to believe some things about God which it would be very hard for us to hold of the Creator of our hearts. Even a human government would be incomplete unless, in some hand, there should be lodged some power of pardon. Not to believe in the authority of God Himself over the execution of His own law is to believe that Gods government is not so perfect as mans. Or, to take the subject up to a higher plane, where I much prefer to study it, our human love can sometimes find for itself a way of forgiveness which it will follow without dimming its own purity, or losing its own self-respect, though it be for it a way of tears. To believe, then, that the God of love can find no way of atonement for sin, though it be the way of the Cross, is to believe that mans heart is diviner than Gods.

4. The other remaining point which I will mention is the Christian belief in the last judgment. Surely everything in this world would be left at loose ends, and all our instincts of justice, righteousness, and love thrown into confusion, if we should attempt to wrench the substance of this Christian faith in the judgment to come from our experience of this present life. Not to believe in it requires a great task of reason and conscience; for then one must believe that there is no moral order, as there is plainly a natural order of things; one must then believe that the one constant undertone of justice in mans consciousness is a false note of life; that the first laws of things are but principles of eternal discord; that mans whole moral life and history, in short, is meaningless and worthless. You say it is a terrible thing to believe in the judgment to come; yes, but it is a more fearful thing not to believe in it. (Newman Smyth, D. D.)

How a faithful minister seeks to recover the erring

He appeals--

I. To the conscience--reminding them of the gracious change God had effected in them (Gal_4:8-9).

II. To the understanding--remanding the reason of their instability--exhibiting its folly (Gal_4:9-11).

III. To the heart--by affectionate entreaty--tender and happy reminiscences (Gal_4:12-15).

IV. To their regard for the truth--which he faithfully preaches--others have perverted--should be zealously maintained (Gal_4:16-18).

V. To his own sincerity--he is anxious for their happiness--to have the assurance of it. (J. Lyth.)

The folly of returning to the world

I. It is to act in opposition to knowledge.

II. To abuse the grace of God.

III. To seek happiness in that we have already proved unsatisfactory.

IV. To subject ourselves to a new bondage. (J. Lyth.)

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

6. Consequent folly of their relapse from faith-justification into old legalism, Gal_4:9-20.

9. But now—After your adult growth and knowledge.

Known God—Not merely as a false Jupiter or a dim Jehovah, but as father through Christ.

Rather… known of God—No longer like children committed to governors and tutors, and overlooked by their father; but like children to whom the Father hath sent the Spirit of sonship, who hears them crying, and knows them as his sons.

How—Imperative rebuke! How can so preposterous a turn be made.

Weak—As childhood.

Beggarly—Penniless as the minor state.

Elements—The first letters, hieroglyphs, and child-pictures of pupilage. That is the circumcision, the holidays, and the rituals of either Judaism or paganism.

Weak—Impotent to strengthen spiritually the soul in its full growth.

Beggarly—Poor in any thing that can satisfy an immortal spirit.

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

4:9 now that you know God: Christians have a relationship with God that is like a child to a parent rather than a slave to a master (4:5-7). • why do you want to go back? Paul was perplexed (cp. 4:19-20) that Christians who had this standing would want to return to their old life of slavery. • now that God knows you: God is the agent of salvation and had taken the initiative in laying their souls bare (cp. Ps 139:1-6, 23-24; Luke 2:34-35; Heb 4:12) and forgiving them freely. • By turning to circumcision, the Galatians would be returning to the same useless spiritual principles of this world that they had known under paganism. In both cases, one must work to satisfy an unyielding master.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Gal 4:9. Γνόντες Θεὸν, knowing God) The true God, who is a Spirit. When you know Him, and yet follow eagerly after those elements, it is the same thing as if a master should wish to return to learn the alphabet [his A B C D child’s book].—μᾶλλον, rather) it is the gift of God. He acknowledged and declared you to be His sons; comp. Exo 33:12; Exo 33:17. What belongs to God, is of the chief consequence as concerns our salvation, rather than what belongs to ourselves; comp. Php 3:12.—πῶς, how?) An interrogation expressing much wonder; Gal 1:6, I marvel.—πάλιν, again) as we have formerly been in bondage.—ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ, weak and beggarly) Weakness opposed to filial boldness, beggarliness, to the abundance connected with the inheritance.—οἷς, to which) to elements, not to God.—πάλιν ἄνωθεν (back) again afresh) You wish to be in bondage again: now to elements, as formerly to idols; and afresh, you are in bondage to the same elements anew, by which Israel had been formerly enslaved; comp. the word again, Rom 8:15, note.—δουλεύειν, to be in bondage) in a manner unworthy of freemen.—θέλετε, you wish) See Gal 4:21, and Mar 12:38, note. [It is not every kind of readiness in wishing or desiring, that is good, Col 2:18; Col 2:23.—V. g.]

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

Gal_4:9. Γνόντες Θεόν] After ye have known God through the preaching of the gospel. Olshausens opinion, that εἰδότες denotes more the merely external knowledge that God is, while γνόντες signifies the inward essential cognition, is shown to be an arbitrary fancy by passages such as Joh_7:37; Joh_8:55; 2Co_5:16.

μᾶλλον δέ] imo vero, a corrective climax (Rom_8:34; Eph_5:11; Jacobs, ad Ach. Tat. II. p. 955; Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. iii. 13. 6; Grimm, on Wis_8:19), in order to give more startling prominence to the following πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε κ.τ.λ., as indicating not a mere falling away from the knowledge of God, but rather a guilty opposition to Him.

γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ] after ye have been known by God. This is the saving knowledge, of which on Gods part men become the objects, when He interests Himself on their behalf to deliver them. Into the experience of having been thus graciously known by God the Galatians were brought by means of the divine work which had taken place in them, anticipating their own volition and endeavourthe work of their calling, enlightenment, and conversion;[188] so that they therefore, when they knew God, became in that very knowledge aware of their being known by God,the one being implied in the otherthrough their divinely bestowed admission into the fellowship of Christ.[189] See on 1Co_8:3; 1Co_13:12; also Mat_7:23. Hofmann desires the condition of the acceptance of grace to be mentally supplied; but this is arbitrary in itself, and is also incorrect, because those, who are the objects of Gods gracious knowledge, are already known to Him by means of His πρόγνωσις as the credituri and are ordained by Him to salvation (see on Rom_8:29 f.). But the literal sense cognoscere is not to be altered either into approbare, amare (Grotius and others), or into agnoscere suos (Wetstein, Vater, Winer, Rückert, Usteri, Schott, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others); nor is it to be understood in the sense of Hophal: brought to the knowledge (Beza, Er. Schmidt, Cornelius a Lapide, Wolf, Nösselt, Koppe, Flatt, and others); nor can we, with Olshausen, turn it into the being penetrated with the love wrought by God, which only follows upon the being known by God, 1Co_8:3. Lastly, there has been introduced, in a way entirely un-Pauline, the idea of the self-recognition of the Divine Spirit in us (Matthies), or of the consciousness of the identity of the human and the divine knowing (Hilgenfeld). On the deliberate change from the active to the passive, γνόντες, γνωσθέντες, comp. Php_3:12. Luther, moreover, appropriately remarks, non ideo cognoscuntur quia cognoscunt, sed contra quia cogniti sunt, ideo cognoscunt.

πῶς] interrogatio admirabunda (Bengel), as in Gal_2:12.

πάλιν] does not mean backwards (Flatt, Hofmann), as in Homer (see Duncan, Lex. ed. Rost, p. 886; Nägelsbach z. Ilias, p. 34, ed. 3),a rendering opposed to the usage of the N.T. generally, and here in particular to the πάλιν ἄνωθεν which follows; it means iterum, and refers to the fact that the readers had previously been already in bondage to the στοιχεῖα, namely, most of them as heathen. Now they turn indeed (ἐπιστρέφετε, present tense, as in i. 6) to the Jewish ordinances; but the heathen and Jewish elements (on the latter, see Heb_7:18 f.) are both included in the category of the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (see on Gal_4:3), so that Paul is logically correct in using the πάλιν; and the hypothesis of Nösselt (Opusc. I. p. 293 ff.; comp. Mynster in his kl. theol. Schr. p. 76; Credner, Einl., and Olshausen), that the greater part of the readers had been previously proselytes of the gate, is entirely superfluous, and indeed at variance with the description of the pre-Christian condition of the Galatians given in Gal_4:8; for according to Gal_4:8, the great mass of them must have been purely heathen before their conversion, because there is no mention of any intermediate condition between τότε and νῦν. According to Wieseler (comp. also Reithmayr), πάλιν is intended to point back to their conversion to Christ, so that the turning to the στοιχεῖα is designated as a second renewed conversion (ἐπιστρέφετε), namely, in pejus. This would yield an ironical contrast, but is rendered impossible by the words οἷς πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλ. θέλετε. Wieseler is driven to adopt so artificial an explanation, because he understands the στοιχεῖα as referring to the law only; and this compels him afterwards to give an incorrect explanation of οἷς.

ἀσθενῆ κ. πτωχά] because they cannot effect and bestow, what God by the sending of His Son has effected and bestowed (Gal_4:5). Comp. Rom_8:3; Rom_10:12; Heb_7:18.

πάλιν ἄνωθεν] for those reverting to Judaism desired to begin again from the commencement the slave-service of the στοιχεῖα, which they had abandoned; ἀρχαῖς προτέραις ἑπόμενοι, Pind. Ol. x. 94. Comp. Wis_19:6. Not a pleonasm, as πάλιν ἐκ δευτέρου (Mat_26:42), πάλιν αὖτις (Hom. Il. i. 59), or δεύτερον αὖθις (Hom. Il. i. 513); but the repetition is represented as a new commencement of the matter, as ἐκ νέας αὖθις ἀρχῆς (Plut. solert. anim. p. 959), and πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς (Barnab. Ep. 16). It is just the same in the instances in Wetstein. The οἷς is, however, the simple dative as in Gal_4:8 and usually with δουλεύειν; it is not equivalent to ἐν οἷς (Wieseler), with δουλ. used absolutely.

θέλετε] ye desire, ye have the wish and the longing for, this servitude! Comp. Gal_4:21.

[188] Hence in point of fact Theophylact (following Chrysostom) rightly explains: προσληφθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ. Because of Gods knowing them they have known God; consequently not, proprio Marte vel acumine sui ingenii vel industria, sed quia Deus misericordia sua eos praevenerit, quum nihil minus quam de ipso cogitarent, Calvin.

[189] Comp. Ignat. ad Magnes. Interpol. Galatians 1 : διʼ οὗ (through Christ) ἔγνωτε Θεὸν, μᾶλλον δὲ ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ἐγνώσθητε. Similarly, in an opposite sense, ad Smyrn. Galatians 5 : ὅν τινες ἁγνοοῦντες ἀρνοῦνται (abnegant), μᾶλλον δὲ ἠρνήθησαν (abnegati sunt) ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ (by Christ).

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 4:9 . μᾶλλον δὲ . This correction is added, lest any should pride themselves on their knowledge of God, to warn them that it is not due to their own act, but to God who recognised them as His sons and repealed Himself to them. ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ . Hitherto the Apostle has spoken with respect of the education given to the world before Christ (Gal 4:1-3 ), bearing in mind the progress of the Greek and Roman world in social habits, institutions and laws: they had in fact learnt much in the sphere of morals and natural religion that would bear comparison with the progress of Israel under the light of the revealed Law of God. But when he compares the mechanical routine of formal observances which formed the staple of religion for the heathen and for many so-called religious Jews with the spiritual teaching of the Gospel, he does not hesitate to denounce them as weak and beggarly.

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

By going backward.

They are called impotent and beggarly ceremonies, being considered apart by themselves without Christ: and again, for that by that means they gave good testimony that they were beggars in Christ, when as notwithstanding, for men, to fall back from Christ to ceremonies, is nothing else, but to cast away riches, and to follow beggarly.

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

known God or rather are known of God--They did not first know and love God, but God first, in His electing love, knew and loved them as His, and therefore attracted them to the saving knowledge of Him (Mat 7:23; Co1 8:3; Ti2 2:19; compare Exo 33:12, Exo 33:17; Joh 15:16; Phi 3:12). God's great grace in this made their fall from it the more heinous.

how--expressing indignant wonder at such a thing being possible, and even actually occurring (Gal 1:6). "How is it that ye turn back again?"

weak--powerless to justify: in contrast to the justifying power of faith (Gal 3:24; compare Heb 7:18).

beggarly--contrasted with the riches of the inheritance of believers in Christ (Eph 1:18). The state of the "child" (Gal 4:1) is weak, as not having attained manhood; "beggarly," as not having attained the inheritance.

elements--"rudiments." It is as if a schoolmaster should go back to learning the A, B, C'S [BENGEL].

again--There are two Greek words in the original. "Ye desire again, beginning afresh, to be in bondage." Though the Galatians, as Gentiles, had never been under the Mosaic yoke, yet they had been under "the elements of the world" (Gal 4:3): the common designation for the Jewish and Gentile systems alike, in contrast to the Gospel (however superior the Jewish was to the Gentile). Both systems consisted in outward worship and cleaved to sensible forms. Both were in bondage to the elements of sense, as though these could give the justification and sanctification which the inner and spiritual power of God alone could bestow.

ye desire--or "will." Will-worship is not acceptable to God (Col 2:18, Col 2:23).

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 9. Now, after that ye have known God] After having been brought to the knowledge of God as your Saviour.

Or rather are known of God] Are approved of him, having received the adoption of sons.

To the weak and beggarly elements] After receiving all this, will ye turn again to the ineffectual rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic law-rites too weak to counteract your sinful habits, and too poor to purchase pardon and eternal life for you? If the Galatians were turning again to them, it is evident that they had been once addicted to them. And this they might have been, allowing that they had become converts from heathenism to Judaism, and from Judaism to Christianity. This makes the sense consistent between the 8th and 9th verses. Ga 4:8-9.

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

9. But now, after that ye have known God. No language can express the base ingratitude of departing from God, when he has once been known. What is it but to forsake, of our own accord, the light, the life, the fountain of all benefits, — “to forsake,” as Jeremiah complains,

“the fountain of living waters, and hew out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water!” (Jeremiah 2:13.)

Still farther to heighten the blame, he corrects his language, and says, or rather have been, known by God; for the greater the grace of God is towards us, our guilt in despising it must be the heavier. Paul reminds the Galatians whence they had derived the knowledge of God. He affirms that they did not obtain it by their own exertions, by the acuteness or industry of their own minds, but because, when they were at the farthest possible remove from thinking of him, God visited them in his mercy. What is said of the Galatians may be extended to all; for in all are fulfilled the words of Isaiah,

“I am sought by them that asked not for me: I am found by them that sought me not.” (Isaiah 65:1.)

The origin of our calling is the free election of God, which predestinates us to life before we are born. On this depends our calling, our faith, our whole salvation.

How turn ye again? They could not turn again to ceremonies which they had never practiced. The expression is figurative, and merely denotes, that to fall again into wicked superstition, as if they had never received the truth of God, was the height of folly. When he calls the ceremonies beggarly elements, he views them as out of Christ, and, what is more, as opposed to Christ. To the fathers they were not only profitable exercises and aids to piety, but efficacious means of grace. But then their whole value lay in Christ, and in the appointment of God. The false apostles, on the other hand, neglecting the promises, endeavored to oppose the ceremonies to Christ, as if Christ alone were not sufficient. That they should be regarded by Paul as worthless trifles, cannot excite surprise; but of this I have already spoken. The word bondage conveys a reproof for submitting to be slaves.

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.

(9) Known God.—The word for “known” is different from that so translated in the verse above. It brings out more distinctly the process of obtaining knowledge, especially with reference to a state of previous ignorance. Having come to know God.

Or rather are known of God.—In speaking of the Galatians as “coming to know” God, it might seem as if too much stress was laid on the human side of the process, and therefore, by way of correction, the Apostle presents also the divine side. Any true and saving knowledge of God has for its converse the “being known of God”—i.e., recognition by God and acceptance by Him, such as is involved in the admission of the believer into the Messianic kingdom.

Again.—In the Greek a double phrase, for the sake of emphasis, over again from the very beginning, as a child might be said to go back to his alphabet.

Weak and beggarly elements.—”Elements” is used here, in the same sense as in Gal_4:3, of that elementary religious knowledge afforded in different degrees to Jew and Gentile before the coming of Christ. These are called “weak” because they were insufficient to enable man to work out his own salvation. (Comp. St. Paul’s account of the inward struggle, and of the helpless condition to which man is reduced by it, in Rom_7:7-24.) They are called “beggarly,” or “poor,” because, unlike the gospel, they were accompanied by no outpouring of spiritual gifts and graces. The legal system was barren and dry; the gospel dispensation was rich with all the abundance and profusion of the Messianic time (Joe_2:19; Joe_3:18; Amo_9:13-14; Isa_4:1; Isa_65:21-25; Joh_7:37-38, et al.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

9. now, after that ye have known … are known] The word rendered ‘known’ is different in the original from that so rendered in Gal_4:8. It here denotes more than the acknowledgment of God’s existence—a discern ment of His character and recognition of His authority, on the part of man; approval on the part of God. The same English word is used in 1Co_13:12 to render a still stronger verb in the Greek of which the margin of R.V. gives ‘fully know’ as the equivalent.

or rather] God knows man before man knows God—an humbling thought.

weak and beggarly elements] See note on Gal_4:3. They are ‘weak’, powerless to give life (Heb_7:18); ‘beggarly’ (rather, ‘poor’) as contrasted with ‘the unsearchable riches of Christ’, the riches of that grace which came by Jesus Christ.

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.

But now, after that ye have known God, God in Christ, as their covenant God and Father, through the preaching of the Gospel, and in the light of divine grace; God having caused light to shine in their dark hearts; and having given them the light of the knowledge of himself in the face of Christ, and having sent down into their hearts the Spirit of his Son, crying "Abba", Father.

Or rather are known of God; for it is but little that the best of these, that have the greatest share of knowledge, know of him; and what knowledge they have, they have it first, originally, and wholly from him: that knowledge which he has of them is particular, distinct, and complete; and is to be understood, not of his omniscience in general, so all men are known by him; but of his special knowledge, joined with affection, approbation, and care: and the meaning is, that they were loved by him with an everlasting love, which had been manifested in their conversion, in the drawing of them to himself, and to his Son; that he approved of them, delighted in them, had an exact knowledge, and took special care of them: but, oh, folly and ingratitude!

how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto you desire again to be in bondage? meaning the ordinances of the ceremonial law, he before calls "the elements of the world", and here "weak", because they could not give life, righteousness, peace, joy, comfort, and salvation; and, since the coming of Christ, were become impotent to all the uses they before served; and beggarly, because they lay in the observation of mean things, as meats, drinks, &c. and which were only shadows of those good things, the riches of grace and glory, which come by Christ. The Galatians are said to turn again to these; not that they were before in the observation of them, except the Jews, but because there was some likeness between these, and the ceremonies with which they carried on the service of their idols; and by showing an inclination to them, they discovered a good will to come into a like state of bondage they were in before; than which nothing could be more stupid and ungrateful in a people that had been blessed with so much grace, and with such clear Gospel light and knowledge.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Ver. 9. Or rather are known of God] Whose gracious foreknowing and foreappointing of us to eternal life is the ground and foundation of our illumination and conversion, our love to him a reflex of his love to us.

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.

But now ... - The sense is, that since they had been made free from their ignoble servitude in the worship of false gods, and had been admitted to the freedom found in the worship of the true God, it was absurd that they should return again to that which was truly slavery or bondage, the observance of the rites of the Jewish law.

That ye have known God - The true God, and the ease and freedom of his service in the gospel.

Or rather are known of God - The sense is, “Or, to speak more accurately or precisely, are known by God.” The object of this correction is to avoid the impression which might be derived from the former phrase that their acquaintance with God was owing to themselves. He therefore states, that it was rather that they were known of God; that it was all owing to him that they had been brought to an acquaintance with himself. Perhaps, also, he means to bring into view the idea that it was a favor and privilege to be known by God, and that therefore it was the more absurd to turn back to the weak and beggarly elements.

How turn ye again - Margin, “Back.” “How is it that you are returning to such a bondage?” The question implies surprise and indignation that they should do it.

To the weak and beggarly elements - To the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish law, imposing a servitude really not less severe than the customs of paganism. On the word elements, see the note at Gal 4:3. They are called “weak” because they had no power to save the soul; no power to justify the sinner before God. They are called “beggarly” (Greek πτωχὰ ptōcha, poor), because they could not impart spiritual riches. They really could confer few benefits on man. Or it may be, as Locke supposes, because the Law kept people in the poor estate of pupils from the full enjoyment of the inheritance; Gal 4:1-3.

Whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage - As if you had a wish to be under servitude. The absurdity is as great as it would be for a man who had been freed from slavery to desire his chains again. They had been freed by the gospel from the galling servitude of paganism, and they now again had sunk into the Jewish observances, as if they preferred slavery to freedom, and were willing to go from one form of it to another. The main idea is, that it is absurd for people who have been made free by the gospel to go back again into any kind of servitude or bondage. We may apply it to Christians now. Many sink into a kind of servitude not less galling than was that to sin before their conversion. Some become the slaves of mere ceremonies and forms in religion. Some are slaves to fashion, and the world still rules them with the hand of a tyrant. They have escaped, it may be, from the galling chains of ambition, and degrading vice, and low sensuality; but they became slaves to the love of money, or of dress, or of the fashions of the world, as if they loved slavery and chains; and they seem no more able to break loose than the slave is to break the bonds which bind him. And some are slaves to some expensive and foolish habit. Professed Christians, and Christian ministers too, become slaves to the disgusting and loathsome habit of using tobacco, bound by a servitude as galling and as firm as that which ever shackled the limbs of an African. I grieve to add also that many professed Christians are slaves to the habit of “sitting long at the wine” and indulging in it freely. O that such knew the liberty of Christian freedom, and would break away from all such shackles, and show how the gospel frees people from all foolish and absurd customs!

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

After that ye have known God; after that you are come to a true and saving knowledge of God in Christ, and know God as he is.

Or rather are known of God; or rather after you are received of God, approved of him, made through Christ acceptable to him, which is much more than a true comprehension of God in your notion and understanding.

How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? How turn you back again to the legal services of the ceremonial law? Which he calleth elements, or rudiments, because they were God’s first instructions given to his church for his worship, to which he intended afterward a more perfect way of worship. He calls them

weak, because they brought nothing to perfection; and the observance of them was impotent as to the justification of a soul, as all the law is. He calls them

beggarly, in comparison of the more rational, spiritual way of worship under the gospel. He saith that they desired

to be in bondage unto these, because they would not see and make use of the liberty from them which Christ had purchased.

Objection. It may be objected, that the Galatians were not educated in Judaism; how then doth the apostle charge them with turning back to them?

Answer. This hath made some think, that, by

the weak and beggarly elements, mentioned in this verse, the apostle meaneth their Gentile superstitions and idolatries; but this is not probable, the apostle, all along the Epistle, charging them with no such apostacy. Others think, that he in this verse chiefly reflecteth on the believing Jews, who afterwards returned again to the use of the law. But why may not we rather say, that he calleth their fact a turning back, not so much with reference to their personal practice, as to the state of the church; which was once under those elements, but by the coming of Christ was brought into a more perfect state. So that for them who were called into the church in the time of this its more perfect state, for them to return to the bondage of the law, that was truly to turn back; if not to any practice of their own, which they had cast off, yet to a state of the church which the church of God had now outgrown.

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

But now (nun de); and now. (See note on then" in ver. 8). After that ye have known God, or rather are known of God (gnontev Qeon mallon dentev ujpo Qeou); after that ye have gotten to know God, or rather to be known of God. Considering the interchangeable use of gnwnai or ejgnwkenai and eijdwenai in Joh_8:55 and 2Co_5:16, it seems precarious to make much distinction between them as applied to the knowledge of God. The former, however, is the verb more commonly used in this relation; by St. John, in his First Epistle, where so much is said of knowing God, exclusively; although in other relations he, both in Epistle and Gospel, uses the two verbs interchangeably. The expression, "to know God," is one of profound pregnancy; denoting nothing less than that divinely imparted intuition of God, that consciousness of his actual being, viewed in his relation to ourselves, which is the result of truly "believing in him." Moreover, as it is knowing a personal Being, between whom and ourselves mutual Action may be looked for, it implies a mutual conversancy between ourselves and him, as the term "acquaintance" (oiJ gnwstoi) tinov), as used in Luk_2:44; Luk_23:49, naturally does. So that "having gotten to be known ofGod" is very nearly equivalent to having been by God brought to be, to speak it reverently, on terms of acquaintanceship with him; and this does indeed seem to be meant in 1Co_8:3. The Galatian believers had in very truth gotten to know God, if they had learnt to cry out unto him, "Abba, Father." And the remembrance of this happy experience of theirs, which he had, we may suppose, himself witnessed in the early days of their discipleship, prompts him to introduce the correction, "or rather to be known of God." Their having attained such a consciousness of sonship had been, as he writes, ver. 7, "through God;" he it was that had sent forth his Sen that his people might receive the adoption of sons; he that had sent forth his Spirit into their hearts to give them the sense of sonship; he had shown that he knew, recognized them to be his, (2Ti_2:19) by gifting them with the blissful prerogative of knowing what he was to them. The correction of "knowing" by "being known" is analogous to that of "apprehend" by "being apprehended" infete Php_3:12. The pragmatic value of this correcting clause is to make the Galatians feel, not only what a wilful self-debasement it was on their part, but also what a slight put upon the Divine favours shown to them, that they should frowardly repudiate their filial standing to adopt afresh that servile standing out of which he had lifted his people. What was this but a high-handed contravening of God"s own work, a frustration of his gospel? And this by them whom only the other day he had rescued from the misery and utter wickedness of idolatry! How turn ye again; or, back (pwv ejpistre palin); how turn ye back again. An abrupt change from the form of sentence which the foregoing words naturally prepared us for; which might have been such as we should have by simply omitting the "how." As if it were, "After having gotten to be known of God, ye are turning back again how can ye? to the weak," etc. This "how," as in Gal_2:14, is simply a question of remonstrance; not expecting an answer, it bids the person addressed consider the amazing unseemliness of his proceeding (so Mat_22:12; comp. also 1Ti_3:5; 1Jn_3:17) The verb ejpistrefein frequently denotes "turning back" (Mat_10:13; 2Pe_2:22; Luk_8:55) To the weak and beggarly elements (ejpi ta ajsqenh kai ptwca stoiceia); the mere elementary lessons, the A, B, G (see ver. 4, and note), which can do nothing for you and have nothing to give you. The description is relative rather than absolute. The horn-book, useful enough for the mere child, is of no use whatever to the grown-up lad who has left school. in Heb_7:18 mention is made of "the weakness and unprofitableness" of the Levitical Law relative to the expiation of sin; which is not precisely the aspect of the Law which is here under view. The word "beggarly" was probably in the writer"s mind contrasted with "the unsearchable riches of Christ" (Eph_3:8) Whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage! (oiv palin anwqen douleuein qelete;); whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over again? The verb douleuein is here, differently from ver. 8, contrasted with the condition of a son enjoying his full independence (see ver. 25 and. Gal_5:1) It would be an insufferable constraint and degradation to the full-grown son to be set to con ever and repeat the lessons of the infant school.

Anwqen, afresh, over again, intensifies palin by adding the notion of making a fresh start from the commencing-point of the course indicated. The application of these words, together especially with the phrase, "turn back again," in the preceding clause, to the case of the Galatian converts from idolatrous heathenism, has suggested to many minds the idea that St. Paul groups the ceremonialism of heathen worship with that of the Mosaic Law. Bishop Lightfoot in particular has here a valuable note, in which, with his usual learning and breadth of view, he shows how the former might in its ritualistic element have subserved the purpose of a disciplinary training for a better religion. Such a view might be regarded as not altogether out of harmony with the apostle"s spirit as evinced in his discourses to the Lyeaonians and the Athenians. (Act_14:15-17 Act_17:22-31) But though in his wide sympatheticalness he might, if discoursing with heathens, have sought thus to win them to a better faith, he is hardly just now in a mood for any such sympathetic tolerance. He is much too indignant at the behaviour of these Galatian revolters to allow that their former religious ceremonies could have been good enough to be admitted to group with those of the Law of Moses: he has just before adverted to their former heathenism for the very purpose of (so to speak) setting them down a purpose which would be a good deal defeated by his referring to that cult of theirs as in any respect standing on a level with the cult of the Hebrews. Indeed, it may be doubted whether, at the utmost limit to which he would at any time have allowed himself to go, in the "economy" which he unquestionably was used to employ in dealing with souls, he would, however, have gone so far as to class the divinely appointed ordinances of Israel, the training-school of God"s own children, with the ritual of demon-inspired worships. It is much easier to suppose that the apostle identifies the Galatian Churchmen with God"s own people, with whom they were now in fact sumfuyoi, blended in corporal identity with them. God"s children had heretofore been in bondage to the A, B, C, of the Law, but were so no longer; if any of those who were now God"s children took it in hand to observe that Law, then were they, though not in their individual identity, yet in their corporate identity, turning back again to the A, B, C, from which they had been emancipated. The former experience of Israel was their experience, as the "fathers" of Israel were their fathers; (1Co_10:1) which experience they were now setting themselves to renew.

A protest against relapse.

now, after having known God, or rather were being known of God, how are you turning again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

I MARK THEIR NEW POSITION OF KNOWLEDGE AND PRIVILEGE. The Galatians had come to know God through the preaching of the gospel.

1. This was their high privilege. "This is life eternal, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

2. It was a sign of Divine fellowship. "I am the good Shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

3. It came through Christ. "No man knoweth the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever he will reveal him." But there is another side to this truth. They were "rather known of God," as if to obviate any possible inference that the reconciliation implied in this knowledge may have been the effect of man"s action. It was an affectionate and interested knowledge on God"s part which made knowledge of God possible on their part. "In thy light shall we see light." God knew them ere they knew him.

II THE INCONSISTENCY OF A RETURN TO WEAK AND BEGGARLY ELEMENTS. They had been slaves to the "elements" under the forms of heathen idolatry; they were now going back into bondage to elements under the form of Judaism.

1. This threatened relapse implied that they had no true understanding or appreciation of the simple gospel of salvation. The seeds of defection and apostasy lie in almost every heart.

2. The apostles surprise at their inconsistency: arising partly from his knowledge of their full and cordial reception of the gospel at the beginning, and partly out of the character of the religion for which they were parting with "the truth of the gospel and beggarly elements." This language of contempt applies to the legal rites of the ceremonial Law, which were, of course, of Divine appointment, and as such to be regarded with due honour. But the elements became "weak and beggarly" by their misapplication in the hands of Pharisaic men. They were "weak," because they had no power to justify or promote salvation; (Rom_8:3) "beggarly," because they could invest no sinner with "the unsearchable riches of Christ." The worshippers, after all their drudgery, found themselves none the better. The apostle might well express his surprise to find Christians going back upon mere elements which the gospel had for ever superseded.

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

But now being known of God - As his beloved children. How turn ye back to the weak and poor elements - Weak, utterly unable to purge your conscience from guilt, or to give that filial confidence in God. Poor - incapable of enriching the soul with such holiness and happiness as ye are heirs to. Ye desire to be again in bondage - Though of another kind; now to these elements, as before to those idols.

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

VERSE 9. But now, after that ye have known God.

"Is it not amazing," cries Paul, "that you Galatians who knew God intimately by the hearing of the Gospel, should all of a sudden revert from the true knowledge of His will in which I thought you were confirmed, to the weak and beggarly elements of the Law which can only enslave you again?"

VERSE 9. Or rather are known of God.

The Apostle turns the foregoing sentence around. He fears the Galatians have lost God altogether. "Alas," he cries, "have you come to this, that you no longer know God? What else am I to think? Nevertheless, God knows you." Our knowledge of God is rather passive than active. God knows us better than we know God. "Ye are known of God" means that God brings His Gospel to our attention, and endows us with faith and the Holy Spirit. Even in these words the Apostle denies the possibility of our knowing God by the performance of the Law. "No man knoweth who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him." (Luk 10:22.) "By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities." (Isa 53:11.)

The Apostle frankly expresses his surprise to the Galatians that they who had known God intimately through the Gospel, should so easily be persuaded by the false apostles to return to the weak and beggarly elements of the Law. I would not be surprised to see my church perverted by some fanatic through one or two sermons. We are no better than the apostles who had to witness the subversion of the churches which they had planted with their own hands. Nevertheless, Christ will reign to the end of the world, and that miraculously, as He did during the Dark Ages.

Paul seems to think rather ill of the Law. He calls it the elements of the world, the weak and beggarly elements of the world. Was it not irreverent for him to speak that way about the holy Law of God? The Law ought to prepare the way of Christ into the hearts of men. That is the true purpose and function of the Law. But if the Law presumes to usurp the place and function of the Gospel, it is no longer the holy Law of God, but a pseudo-Gospel.

If you care to amplify this matter you may add the observation that the Law is a weak and beggarly element because it makes people weak and beggarly. The Law has no power and affluence to make men strong and rich before God. To seek to be justified by the Law amounts to the same thing as if a person who is already weak and feeble should try to find strength in weakness, or as if a person with the dropsy should seek a cure by exposing himself to the pestilence, or as if a leper should go to a leper, and a beggar to a beggar to find health and wealth.

Those who seek to be justified by the Law grow weaker and more destitute right along. They are weak and bankrupt to begin with. They are by nature the children of wrath. Yet for salvation they grasp at the straw of the Law. The Law can only aggravate their weakness and poverty. The Law makes them ten times weaker and poorer than they were before.

I and many others have experienced the truth of this. I have known monks who zealously labored to please God for salvation, but the more they labored the more impatient, miserable, uncertain, and fearful they became. What else can you expect? You cannot grow strong through weakness and rich through poverty. People who prefer the Law to the Gospel are like Aesop’s dog who let go of the meat to snatch at the shadow of the water. There is no satisfaction in the Law. What satisfaction can there be in collecting laws with which to torment oneself and others? One law breeds ten more until their number is legion.

Who would have thought it possible that the Galatians, taught as they were by that efficient apostle and teacher, Paul, could so quickly be led astray by the false apostles? To fall away from the Gospel is an easy matter because few people appreciate what an excellent treasure the knowledge of Christ really is. People are not sufficiently exercised in their faith by afflictions. They do not wrestle against sin. They live in security without conflict. Because they have never been tried in the furnace of affliction they are not properly equipped with the armor of God and know not how to use the sword of the Spirit. As long as they are being shepherded by faithful pastors, all is well. But when their faithful shepherds are gone and wolves disguised as sheep break into the fold, back they go to the weak and beggarly elements of the Law.

Whoever goes back to the Law loses the knowledge of the truth, fails in the recognition of his sinfulness, does not know God, nor the devil, nor himself, and does not understand the meaning and purpose of the Law. Without the knowledge of Christ a man will always argue that the Law is necessary for salvation, that it will strengthen the weak and enrich the poor. Wherever this opinion holds sway the promises of God are denied, Christ is demoted, hypocrisy and idolatry are established.

VERSE 9. Whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage.

The Apostle pointedly asks the Galatians whether they desire to be in bondage again to the Law. The Law is weak and poor, the sinner is weak and poor--two feeble beggars trying to help each other. They cannot do it. They only wear each other out. But through Christ a weak and poor sinner is revived and enriched unto eternal life.

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.

but now that ye have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how turn ye back again to the weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over again?

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.

9. But now, after that ye have known God. Having learned the knowledge of the true God. Or rather, are known of God. God, himself, had sought them through the gospel, and had offered them eternal life. They knew God because God had taken note of them and sent them the gospel. How turn ye again. How can they, known of God, called from the bondage of those that are not gods (verse 8), turn back again to bondage? The bondage referred to is that of the law. They had been delivered from the bondage of idolatry, but were relapsing into another bondage. Weak and beggarly elements. Weak, because they have no spiritual power to strengthen us; beggarly, because they have no rich promises like the gospel; elements, because they belong to a rudimentary condition, to an undeveloped state to the childhood of the race.

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.

9. δουλεῦσαι אB. δουλεύειν Text. Rec. with ACD etc.

9. νῦν δὲ. Since your conversion; answering to τότε μέν.

γνόντες θεόν. For the contrast with εἰδέναι see 2Co 5:16. Having learned, having come to know by personal acquaintance. Compare the quotation on προέκοπτον, Gal 1:14. St Paul does not state the means of their knowledge, but he at once proceeds to prevent their taking any credit for it.

μᾶλλον δὲ (Rom 8:34) γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ. The initiative was not theirs, neither was their knowledge complete. Observe further that knowledge of them by God implies His recognition of them as His (Exo 33:12; Exo 33:17), cf. 1Co 8:3. Probably there is also a distinct reference to His “knowledge” of them by adopting them as sons, Gal 4:5. “To know God as God, is to be in vital fellowship with Him, to love Him, to fulfil that relation towards Him for which we are born. And conversely to be known by God, to be the object of His knowledge, is to be in harmony with Him” (Westcott on 1Jn 2:3).

πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε (contrast 1Th 1:9) πάλιν (Gal 5:1) ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα (Gal 4:3 note). He does not say or mean τοὺς φύσει μὴ ὄντας θεούς (cf. Gal 4:8), but, as always, when apparently about to repeat himself, introduces a fresh point. Thus here στοιχεῖα does not = gods, but what they represent, the mere rudiments of religion. The epithets show their lack of spiritual power and of spiritual wealth.

Observe that St Paul here regards Judaism and the heathen religions as so far alike that they both represent Law in contrast to Grace, rudiments in contrast to advanced knowledge, weakness in contrast to strength, poverty in contrast to wealth. He is not concerned with the nobler and more spiritual side of the O.T. religion, but with that which it had in common, whether by origin or only in character, with heathenism. This includes not only the ceremonial but also the moral law in so far as this is regarded apart from Christ.

Luther is essentially right in saying “Doth Paul take it to be all one thing, to fall from the promise to the law, from faith to works, and to do service unto gods which by nature are no gods? I answer: whosoever is fallen from the article of Justification, is ignorant of God, and an idolator.… The reason is, because God will or can be known no otherwise than by Christ.… There is no mean between man’s working and the knowledge of Christ. If this knowledge be darkened or defaced, it is all one whether thou be a Monk, a Turk, a Jew etc.” (on Gal 4:8-9).

οἶς πάλιν ἄνωθεν. Wis 19:6[122] ὅλη γὰρ ἡ κτίσις ἐν ἰδίῳ γένει πάλιν ἄνωθεν διετυποῦτο (“was fashioned again anew,” R.V.). Otherwise Josephus seems to be the first writer who uses it, though it is found in inscriptions of the second and first centuries B.C. See reff. in Nägeli, Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus, 1905, p. 39. The combination means that they purpose relapsing to the bondage of the στοιχεῖα and practising them all over again from the very beginning, cf. Barn. § 16. 8 ἐγενόμεθα καινοί, πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς κτιζόμενοι.

[122] Is affixed it means that all the passages are mentioned where the word occurs in the Greek Bible.

δουλεῦσαι. The text seems to express “to enter into bondage to.” The marginal δουλεύειν rather expresses continuance in bondage.

θέλετε (Gal 4:21).

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.

9.] “The distinction which Olsh. attempts to set up between εἰδότες as the mere outward, and γνόντες as the inner knowledge, is mere arbitrary fiction: see Joh 7:26, Joh 7:27; Joh 8:55; 2Co 5:16.” Meyer.

μᾶλλον δὲ γν. ὑπ. θ.] See note on 1Co 8:3. Here the propriety of the expression is even more strikingly manifest than there: the Galatians did not so much acquire the knowledge of God, as they were taken into knowledge, recognized, by Him,—προσληφθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ, Thl.: οὐδὲ γὰρ ὑμεῖς καμόντες εὕρετε τὸν θεόν, … αὐτὸς δὲ ὑμᾶς ἐπεσπάσατο, Chrys. And this made their fall from Him the more matter of indignant appeal, as being a resistance of His will respecting them. No change of the meaning of γνωσθ. must be resorted to, as ‘approved,’ ‘loved’ (Grot., al.: see others in De W. and Mey.): cf. Mat 25:12; 2Ti 2:19. Cf. also Php 3:12.

πῶς] how is it that …? see reff.

ἀσθ.] so the προάγουσα ἐντολή is called in Heb 7:18, ἀσθενὲς κ. ἀνωφελές. Want of power to justify is that to which the word points here.

πτωχ.] in contrast with the riches which are in Christ. Or both words may perhaps refer back to the state of childhood hinted at in ver. 6, during which the heir is ἀσθενής, as immature, and πτωχός, as not yet in possession. But this would not strictly apply to the elements as the Gentiles were concerned with them: see below. On στοιχεῖα, see note, ver. 3.

πάλιν] These Galatians had never been Jews before: but they had been be fore under the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου, under which generic term both Jewish and Gentile cultus was comprised: so that they were turning back again to these elements.

ἄνωθεν] from the beginning,—afresh; not a repetition of πάλιν: Mey. quotes πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, Barnab. Ep. 16, p. 773 Migne: and Wetstein gives, from Plautus, Cas. Prol. 33, ‘rursum denuo.’

θέλετε, as in E. V., ye desire: but if thus expressed here by our translators, why not also in Joh 5:40, where it is still more emphatic?

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

9. νῦν δὲ γνόντες θεόν, μᾶλλον δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ θεοῦ, “But now having come to know God, or rather to be known by God.” Their coming to know God is manifestly through the apostle’s preaching. Cf. 1Th 1:9: πῶς ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων δουλεύειν θεῷ ζῶντι, language which, as the evidence of this epistle shows, might have been addressed to the Galatians also. That γνωσθέντες as here used can not refer simply to knowledge in a purely theoretic or intellectual sense is evident, since the apostle must have regarded such knowledge as always, not simply now (νῦν in contrast with τότε), possessed by God. For the meaning required here, “having become objects of his favourable attention,” cf. Psa 1:6, Nah 1:7, 1Co 8:3, Mat 7:23, and on the thought of God receiving the Gentiles into a favour not previously enjoyed by them, see Rom 9:25f., Rom 11:30. This fact respecting Gentiles in general the apostle conceived to be realised in respect to the Galatians in particular through his preaching the gospel to them in accordance with his commission as apostle to the Gentiles. The purpose of this added phrase, in a sense displacing the previous γνόντες, etc., is doubtless to remind the Galatians that it is not to themselves but to God that they owe their knowledge of him and escape from idolatry (cf. chap. 1:6: μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντος ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ, and Eph 2:8), and so to emphasise the folly and wrong of abandoning this advantage through another ἐπιστρέφειν.

Though γινώσκω does not always retain its inchoative force (see Th. s. v.) even in the aorist, yet this is often clearly discernible (cf. Luk 24:18, 1Co 1:21), and the aorist participle in particular always, apparently, retains this meaning, signifying either “having learned, having come to know,” or “knowing” (result of having come to know), not “having known.” See Mat 16:8, Mat 22:18, Mat 26:10, Mar 6:38, Mar 15:45, Luk 9:11, Joh 5:6, Act 23:6, Rom 1:21, 2Co 5:21, Gal 2:9. By γνόντες there is, therefore, affirmed the acquisition of that knowledge the former possession of which is denied in οὐκ εἰδότες. Of any other distinction between εἰδότες and γνόντες, as, e. g., that the former denotes an external knowledge that God is, the latter an inner recognition of God, there is no basis in usage or warrant in the context. The absence of the article with θεόν is not without significance (cf. Rom 1:21, γνόντες τὸν θεόν. 1Co 1:21: οὐκ ἔγνω ὁ κόσμος … τὸν θεόν), being doubtless due to the same cause that led to the omission of the article in v. 8 (q. v.), viz., emphasis upon the qualities of deity in antithesis to the φύσει μὴ ὄντες θεοί. Cf. 1Th 1:9 quoted above, noting τὸν θεόν in the first mention of God, and θεῷ without the article when the word follows the mention of the idols and with emphasis on the qualities of true deity. One might imperfectly reproduce the effect in English by reading with strong emphasis on the word God. But now having come to know [a] God (not those that are no real gods).

Μᾶλλον δέ, following a negative phrase, introduces and emphasises its positive correlate (Eph 4:28, Eph 5:11); following a positive expression it introduces an additional and more important fact or aspect of the matter, not thereby retracting what precedes (probably not even in Wisd. 8:20, certainly not in Rom 8:34, 1Co 14:1, 1Co 14:5, 1Co 14:2 Mac. 6:23), but so transferring the emphasis to the added fact or aspect as being of superior significance as in effect to displace the preceding thought. So clearly here, as in Rom 8:34, etc.

πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα, οἷς πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θελετε; “how is it that ye are turning back again to the weak and beggarly rudiments, to which ye wish to be in bondage again?” The question is rhetorical, intended to set forth the absurdity of the action referred to. On the use of πῶς in such questions, meaning “how is it possible that,” see chap. 2:14, Rom 3:6, Rom 6:2, Mat 7:4, Mat 7:12:26, Mat 7:29, et freq. The present tense presents the action as already in progress. (Observe that in the examples cited, when a theoretical possibility is spoken of the tense is a future or a form referring to the future, but in chap. 2:14 it is a present, referring, as in this case, to something in progress.) This corresponds with the representation of the situation in Galatia given in 1:6: θαυμάζωὅτι … μετατίθεσθε. Cf. also θέλετε in next clause. The phrase τὰ άσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα manifestly refers to what v. 3 calls τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου; see on that v., and detached note, p. 510. The present expression emphasises the ineffectualness and poverty of the old religious systems in contrast with the power and richness of the gospel. See chap. 5:6, 16-24, Rom 1:17, Rom 1:8:3, Rom 1:4. It is, of course, that to which they were now turning that is specially in mind, yet the former heathenism, included under the στοιχεῖα by implication of the repeated πάλιν, is also thereby stigmatised as ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχά. Both were at bottom legalistic, without clear perception of ethical principles and destitute of dynamic to make possible the realisation of them in life. What the apostle says in Rom 8:3 of the law, ὁ νόμος, is affirmed of it, not because of anything peculiar to it as distinguished from the still more imperfect ethnic systems, but because of that which was common to them both, and his usual term for the displaced system is not ὁ νόμος, but νόμος (see, e. g., chap. 3:2, 10, 11.Rom 3:20, Rom 3:21a. etc.). The word θέλετε in the appended relative clause expresses forcibly the inclination of the Galatians to abandon the Pauline gospel. Cf. θέλοντες, v. 21.

Δουλεῦσαι is attested by אB only; all other authorities apparently read δουλέυειν. The former is quite certainly a modification of the original text under the influence of πάλιν ἄνωθεν, which naturally calls for an inceptive form. The scribe missing the reference of the present to a second period of enslavement, substitutes the aorist to express the idea of a return to bondage. πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεῦσαι would have furnished no temptation to change it.

Πάλιν originally meaning “back” (return to a previous position; cf. L.&S. and Th. s. v. and reff. there) but more commonly, in later Greek, “again” (repetition of a previous action) is often used when the repetition involves return to a previous state or position (Mar 2:1, Mar 3:1); but also (like the English “again”) when the action is a return to a previous state through reversal, not, strictly speaking, repetition. So in chap. 1:17, Joh 10:18, Rom 11:23. So also here, since there had been no previous ἐπιστρέφειν ἐπὶ τὰ … στοιχεῖα, but only an εἷναι ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα, and the contemplated ἐπιστρέφειν was not a repetition of a previous act but a reversal of the ἐπιστρέφειν πρὸς τὸν θεόν (cf. 1Th 1:9), here described in γνόντες θεόν. Wieseler’s statement, “Das πάλιν, welches hier wiederum, nicht rückwärts, heisst, weist auf eine frühere Bekehrung (ἐπιστροφή) hin, nämlich auf die ihrem, v. 8 erwähnten Heidenthume gegenüber in dem νῦν δέ u. s. w. angedeutete Bekehrung von den Götzen (ἐπιστροφὴ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων) zu Gott in Christo,” escapes self-contradiction only by the expedient of supposing πάλιν to apply to ἐπιστρέφετε only, not to ἐπιστρέφετε ἐπὶ … στοιχεῖα, an interpretation which would require us to read: “How turn ye again, this time to the weak and beggarly rudiments?” The view, moreover, in support of which he resorts to this difficult expedient, viz., that Paul does not include the former heathenism of the Galatians under τὰ … στοιχεῖα compels him further to limit the effect of πάλιν ἄνωθεν in the next clause to δουλεύειν, reading in effect, “to which ye desire to be in bondage, this constituting for you a second bondage.” Such a harsh severance of verb and adverb in two successive clauses is not demanded by the usage of πάλιν and is, in fact, self-refuting. The obvious and unescapable implication of the language is that the conversion to τὰ … στοιχεῖα is a return to a state generically the same as the idol-worship under which they formerly were. Against this it is irrelevant to point out that ἐπιστρέφειν does not mean “return” but only “turn,” since the idea of reversal is expressed in the adverb. The expression πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν is pregnant, the adverb suggesting a renewed enslavement and the present tense of the infinitive a continued state; hence in effect again to become enslaved and to continue so, or to endure a second period of enslavement. δουλεῦσαι would probably be inceptive. πάλιν, then, in this case expresses repetition rather than, as in the preceding clause, reversal, though, as in many other cases (Mar 2:1, Mar 3:1, etc.), the repetition involves also return to a former position. Cf. 5:1. It is enforced by the nearly synonymous ἄνωθεν “anew.” It is probably an overrefinement to find in this use of the two words (cf. Wisd. 19:6) anything more than emphasis, such as is often expressed in Greek writers by αὖθις, ἄνωθεν, etc.

9. An affectionate appeal to the Galatians to enter fully into their freedom from law, referring to their former enthusiastic reception of the apostle and affection for him, and expressing the wish that he were now with them and could speak to them in more persuasive language than he had formerly used (4:12-20)

Dropping argument, the resumption of which in vv. 21-31 is probably an after-thought, the apostle turns to appeal, begging the Galatians to take his attitude towards the law, referring to the circumstances under which he had preached the gospel to them, and the enthusiasm and personal affection with which, despite an illness which made him unattractive to them, they had received him and his message. He compares his own zealous pursuit of them with that of his opponents, justifying his by its motive, but expresses, also, the wish that he could be present with them right now and speak in a different tone from that, by implication harsher one, which he had employed on some previous occasion when he had “told them the truth.”

12Become as I am (or have become), because I am as ye are, I beseech you, brethren. 13Ye did me no wrong, but ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel to you on that former occasion; 14and that which was a temptation to you in my flesh, ye did not reject or despise, but ye received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus. 15Where, then, is that gratulation of yourselves? For I bear you witness that ye would, if possible, have plucked out your eyes and given them to me. 16So that I have become your enemy by telling you the truth! 17They zealously seek you, not honestly, but wish to shut you out that ye may seek them. 18But it is good to be zealously sought after in a good thing, always, and not only when I am present with you, 19oh, my children, with whom I travail again in birth pangs till Christ be formed in you. 20But I could wish to be present with you now, and to change my tone; because I am in perplexity in reference to you.

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

Rather are known of God. Rather corrects the first statement, have known God, which might seem to attach too much to human agency in attaining the knowledge of God. The divine side of the process is thrown into the foreground by are known, etc. Known does not mean approved or acknowledged, but simply recognized. Saving knowledge is doubtless implied, but is not expressed in the word. The relation of knowledge between God and his sons proceeds from God. The Galatians had not arrived at the knowledge of God by intuition nor by any process of reasoning. "God knew them ere they knew him, and his knowing them was the cause of their knowing him" (Eadie). Comp. 1Co 13:12; 2Ti 2:19; Mt 7:23. Dean Stanley remarks that "our knowledge of God is more his act than ours." If God knows a man, that fact implies an activity of God which passes over to the man, so that he, as the subject of God 's knowledge, comes into the knowledge of God. In N. T. ginwskein often implies a personal relation between the knower and the known, so that knowledge implies influence. See 1Co 2:8; Joh 1:10; Joh 2:24; Joh 17:3. For a parallel to this interchange between the active and the passive, see Phi 3:12.

How [πως] . "A question full of wonder" (Bengel). Comp. I marvel, chapter Gal 1:6.

Turn ye again [επιστρεφετε παλιν] . Better, the continuous present, are ye turning, as of a change still in progress. Comp. chapter Gal 1:6. Palin again, according to N. T. usage, and corresponding with palin anwqen in the following clause. Not back, which is the earlier sense and the usual classical meaning.

Weak and beggarly elements [ασθενη και πτωχα στοιχεια] . For elements see on verse 3. For ptwca beggarly, see on Mt 5:3. The two adjectives express the utter impotence of these "elements" to do and to bestow what was done and given by God in sending his Son into the world. Comp. Rom 8:3; Heb 7:18.

Again [παλιν ανωθεν] . Anwqen [ανω αβοςε] adds to palin the idea of going back to the beginning. Its primary meaning is from above; thence, from the first, reckoning in a descending series. So Luk 1:3; Act 26:5. 71 Such combinations as this are not uncommon in N. T. and Class. See, for instance, Act 18:21; Mt 26:42; Act 10:15; Joh 21:16. But these additions to palin are not pleonastic. They often define and explain it. Thus, Joh 21:16, palin marks the repetition of Jesus ' question, deuteron the number of the repetition. He asked again, and this was the second time of asking.

Ye desire [θελετε] . It was more than a mere desire. They were bent on putting themselves again into bondage. See on Mt 1:19.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.