Galatians Chapter 4
Chapter four is directly related to the ground work Paul has just laid in chapter three. He states the following:
I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything, but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by his father. In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God (4:1-7).
Note that these verses contain the same themes of chapter three concerning heirs, guardians, and slavery/imprisonment. We must read chapter four in light of chapter three. Paul has established that without Christ, we are like slaves. Without Christ, the law functions as a guardian that tells us what to do and shows that we fail to meet this standard. Therefore, we are in prison. But when we trust in the saving work of Christ, we put on Christ and are no longer slaves but become as he is. We become sons of God and therefore have an inheritance in him, eternal life.
Here, Paul shifts his analogy from one in prison to a minor who, though he is heir to his father's estate, does not yet have full rights to that estate. Instead, because he is still a child, he is under guardians and managers and his rights are the same as those of a slave. In other words, he does not have his inheritance. Likewise, before we trusted in the promise of Abraham and came to know Christ, we were like children, lacking inheritance. With only our works to lean on, we were unrighteous and cut off from God.
Without Christ, we are like slaves, under guardians, enslaved to sin. The law functioned as a guardian before we came to know Christ because it showed us our sin. It showed us our need for a Savior. Its job was to lead us to Christ. Now that we know Christ, we are no longer under the desperation and helplessness we experienced when all we had was the law. Now we have put on Christ; we depend on his righteousness and not our own works. We are no longer imprisoned.
Torah was not the prison. Torah was the guardian that showed us we were in prison and needed the Messiah. Torah never taught works-based righteousness. Through the law, God taught righteousness through faith, but without Christ, there is no hope. There is nothing to trust in.
In this analogy, the minor is under guardians until the date set by his father. He is as a slave until his father releases him from the guardians and gives him the rights of his sonship. We too were once under guardians, and at that time we were enslaved to the elementary principles of this world (4:3).
What are the elementary principles of this world to which we were enslaved? Paul equates them with a child being under guardians when he says “in the same way” (connecting verses two and three). In other words, when we are governed by these elementary principles, we are enslaved, just as we were enslaved when we trusted our own works. We will discuss the Greek phrase “τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου” (ta stoicheia tou kosmou), translated “elementary principles of the world,” in more detail below (4:9). There, we will argue that “elementary principles” refers specifically to the false teachings and traditions of man, which contradict and stand against the Word of God.
For now, let's relate this enslavement to what Paul has said previously. Remember in 3:22, he said that the scriptures imprisoned everything under sin. The scriptures themselves are not elementary principles of this world, but the very words of God (2 Timothy 3:16). As we stated in our commentary on 3:22, the law was weakened by the flesh (cf. Romans 8:3). When our unregenerate, sinful hearts (i.e. the flesh) encounter God's good commands (the scriptures/Torah), our natural response is to disobey. This natural response to disobey is what Paul calls the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2). What we are enslaved to is not God's commands, but our own sinful hearts. Because of our sinful hearts, we experience God’s curses instead of his blessing. His law reveals the depths of our sin and describes how God justly responds to it. We are cut off from him.
But now God has sent his Son to redeem us from our prison so that we receive our rights as sons. The date set by the Father has arrived (4:2) and the fullness of time has come (4:4) because Christ has taken the curse of the law upon himself, freeing us from it (3:13). He became like us in every way, even being “born under the law,” so that he could redeem us who were under the law.
Christ “Under the Law”?
This particular passage can be confusing and requires a closer examination:
Here, Paul shifts his analogy from one in prison to a minor who, though he is heir to his father's estate, does not yet have full rights to that estate. Instead, because he is still a child, he is under guardians and managers and his rights are the same as those of a slave. In other words, he does not have his inheritance. Likewise, before we trusted in the promise of Abraham and came to know Christ, we were like children, lacking inheritance. With only our works to lean on, we were unrighteous and cut off from God.
Without Christ, we are like slaves, under guardians, enslaved to sin. The law functioned as a guardian before we came to know Christ because it showed us our sin. It showed us our need for a Savior. Its job was to lead us to Christ. Now that we know Christ, we are no longer under the desperation and helplessness we experienced when all we had was the law. Now we have put on Christ; we depend on his righteousness and not our own works. We are no longer imprisoned.
Torah was not the prison. Torah was the guardian that showed us we were in prison and needed the Messiah. Torah never taught works-based righteousness. Through the law, God taught righteousness through faith, but without Christ, there is no hope. There is nothing to trust in.
In this analogy, the minor is under guardians until the date set by his father. He is as a slave until his father releases him from the guardians and gives him the rights of his sonship. We too were once under guardians, and at that time we were enslaved to the elementary principles of this world (4:3).
What are the elementary principles of this world to which we were enslaved? Paul equates them with a child being under guardians when he says “in the same way” (connecting verses two and three). In other words, when we are governed by these elementary principles, we are enslaved, just as we were enslaved when we trusted our own works. We will discuss the Greek phrase “τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου” (ta stoicheia tou kosmou), translated “elementary principles of the world,” in more detail below (4:9). There, we will argue that “elementary principles” refers specifically to the false teachings and traditions of man, which contradict and stand against the Word of God.
For now, let's relate this enslavement to what Paul has said previously. Remember in 3:22, he said that the scriptures imprisoned everything under sin. The scriptures themselves are not elementary principles of this world, but the very words of God (2 Timothy 3:16). As we stated in our commentary on 3:22, the law was weakened by the flesh (cf. Romans 8:3). When our unregenerate, sinful hearts (i.e. the flesh) encounter God's good commands (the scriptures/Torah), our natural response is to disobey. This natural response to disobey is what Paul calls the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2). What we are enslaved to is not God's commands, but our own sinful hearts. Because of our sinful hearts, we experience God’s curses instead of his blessing. His law reveals the depths of our sin and describes how God justly responds to it. We are cut off from him.
But now God has sent his Son to redeem us from our prison so that we receive our rights as sons. The date set by the Father has arrived (4:2) and the fullness of time has come (4:4) because Christ has taken the curse of the law upon himself, freeing us from it (3:13). He became like us in every way, even being “born under the law,” so that he could redeem us who were under the law.
Christ “Under the Law”?
This particular passage can be confusing and requires a closer examination:
But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God (Galatians 4:4-7).
We have argued that Paul uses the phrase hupo nomos (“under the law”) to refer to those who know God’s standard of right and wrong yet are helpless to obey it. Typically, hupo nomos is used to describe fallen humanity, who has refused to accept creation's testimony about the Creator (Romans 1:20), and of Israel, who has rejected the Torah and thereby incurred the penalties specified in the Torah in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28.
But here, Paul says the Messiah himself was born hupo nomos. Since we know that the Messiah is without sin, we know that he has not done anything that is contrary to the natural law or to the revealed law of the Torah. And yet, Paul says, he was born of a woman, born under the law. How can this be?
First, Jesus was born into a world that was hupo nomos. Jews and Gentiles failed to obey what they knew was right and found themselves in prison, hopeless, without a savior. As Romans 3 makes clear, all people were found guilty:
But here, Paul says the Messiah himself was born hupo nomos. Since we know that the Messiah is without sin, we know that he has not done anything that is contrary to the natural law or to the revealed law of the Torah. And yet, Paul says, he was born of a woman, born under the law. How can this be?
First, Jesus was born into a world that was hupo nomos. Jews and Gentiles failed to obey what they knew was right and found themselves in prison, hopeless, without a savior. As Romans 3 makes clear, all people were found guilty:
For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” “The venom of asps is under their lips.” “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known.” “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God (Romans 3:9–19, emphasis ours).
In Romans 3, Paul quotes passage after passage to show that the scriptures themselves stand as witness against both Jews and Gentiles. All are without excuse and accountable to God for their sinful behavior. This is the world that Jesus was born into, of woman, under the law.
Second, Jesus came into this world to take on the wrath of God for us. He was in no way under the reign of sin personally, and yet he still bore the consequence of sin. In fact, no one has been under the law, experiencing God’s wrath, like Jesus. For indeed the prophet Isaiah has written of him:
Second, Jesus came into this world to take on the wrath of God for us. He was in no way under the reign of sin personally, and yet he still bore the consequence of sin. In fact, no one has been under the law, experiencing God’s wrath, like Jesus. For indeed the prophet Isaiah has written of him:
Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned— every one—to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities (Isaiah 53:4–11).
Jesus died to free us from the consequences we deserve, not from the righteous instructions on how to love and serve God and how to love man found within the Torah. God forbid that we who have died to sin should live any longer in it (Romans 6:2)! We have not been granted a license for disobeying the law, but rather a freedom from the condemnation of the law.
Christ bore the curse for us, and now we are adopted as sons (receiving the full rights of sonship) and are given the gift of the Spirit (4:5-7). Therefore, not only are we set free from the curse of the law, but we also are enabled to live a life, not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Consider Paul's words in Romans 8:12-17:
Christ bore the curse for us, and now we are adopted as sons (receiving the full rights of sonship) and are given the gift of the Spirit (4:5-7). Therefore, not only are we set free from the curse of the law, but we also are enabled to live a life, not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Consider Paul's words in Romans 8:12-17:
So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him (emphasis ours).
Note the similar language here to Galatians 4:1-7, in which adoption as sons and the Spirit are connected, through whom we cry “Abba!,” through whom we are heirs. And Romans eight makes clear that it is this same Spirit who enables us to leave behind the flesh and walk in obedience to God. We are no longer enslaved to our sinful nature, to our flesh.
In summary, the key idea of 3:23-4:7 is that we are no longer under guardians. Those under guardians do not depend on the work of Christ but must trust in their own works, which fall terribly short. Those under guardians do not enjoy, experience, or share in the inheritance of Christ. Those under guardians are not Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to God’s promise (3:29). Paul pleads with the Galatians to understand the seriousness of remaining under a works-based salvation.
To What are the Galatians Enslaved?
Now, let's consider how this is related to the elementary principles of the world (ta stoicheia tou kosmou), first mentioned in verse three, and again referenced in verse nine. This phrase occurs in the New Testament here in Galatians four, as well as in Colossians two, which we will study in more depth below. The Greek word stoicheia can have several different meanings, but at its simplest level, it refers to the component parts of a series or the elements that make up the physical universe (Fung, 189). It can also be used as an astronomical term (referring to “heavenly lights” or planets) and is even used sometimes to refer to the elemental spirits or deities (ibid). Based on its usage in Galatians and Colossians, many interpret the stoicheia as demonic forces and rulers (Esser, 452).
BDAG defines its varied usage as either the basic components of something or as “transcendent powers that are in control over events in this world” (BDAG, 946). It is greatly debated which of the two Paul has in mind in Galatians and Colossians. Some say he uses it more in the first sense of basic components, and that it therefore refers “to the elementary forms of religion, Jewish and polytheistic” (ibid). Others “hold that the reference is to the elemental spirits which the syncretistic religious tendencies of later antiquity associated with the physical elements” (ibid). Under this view, the elementary principles have a demonic source.
After introducing them in verse three, Paul speaks more of the elementary principles in Galatians 4:8-11:
In summary, the key idea of 3:23-4:7 is that we are no longer under guardians. Those under guardians do not depend on the work of Christ but must trust in their own works, which fall terribly short. Those under guardians do not enjoy, experience, or share in the inheritance of Christ. Those under guardians are not Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to God’s promise (3:29). Paul pleads with the Galatians to understand the seriousness of remaining under a works-based salvation.
To What are the Galatians Enslaved?
Now, let's consider how this is related to the elementary principles of the world (ta stoicheia tou kosmou), first mentioned in verse three, and again referenced in verse nine. This phrase occurs in the New Testament here in Galatians four, as well as in Colossians two, which we will study in more depth below. The Greek word stoicheia can have several different meanings, but at its simplest level, it refers to the component parts of a series or the elements that make up the physical universe (Fung, 189). It can also be used as an astronomical term (referring to “heavenly lights” or planets) and is even used sometimes to refer to the elemental spirits or deities (ibid). Based on its usage in Galatians and Colossians, many interpret the stoicheia as demonic forces and rulers (Esser, 452).
BDAG defines its varied usage as either the basic components of something or as “transcendent powers that are in control over events in this world” (BDAG, 946). It is greatly debated which of the two Paul has in mind in Galatians and Colossians. Some say he uses it more in the first sense of basic components, and that it therefore refers “to the elementary forms of religion, Jewish and polytheistic” (ibid). Others “hold that the reference is to the elemental spirits which the syncretistic religious tendencies of later antiquity associated with the physical elements” (ibid). Under this view, the elementary principles have a demonic source.
After introducing them in verse three, Paul speaks more of the elementary principles in Galatians 4:8-11:
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles [stoicheia] of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.
Before the Galatian believers came to know Christ, they were “enslaved to those that by nature are not gods” (8). They were worshipping pagan deities and thereby accepting falsehood as truth. Paul equates such worship to accepting “the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world” (again, the Greek word is stoicheia as in verse three above). Then, Paul says something that must have shocked the Galatians, who had thought they had left behind such falsehood. He says that they are again turning back to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world. Paul points to their observation of certain days, months, seasons, and years as evidence of their return to falsehood. To what is Paul referring?
We have at least three possible explanations:
1. The Classical Christian Interpretation
By submitting to observance of the Mosaic Law, the Galatians were accepting, yet again, weak and worthless elementary principles. In other words, the Mosaic Law constitutes these weak and worthless principles. Paul believes followers of Christ do not have to obey the law, and if they do, they are walking on dangerous ground. “Days, months, seasons, and years,” under this interpretation, refer to the weekly Sabbath, new moon festivals, annual festivals (such as Passover, Feast of Weeks, and Feast of Tabernacles), and Sabbatical years.
In one sense, this interpretation seemingly fits the context, as Paul has been discussing the law throughout Galatians, including its purpose and its misuse by the Judaizers. However, this interpretation drastically falls short when one considers what the New Testament tells us about Paul.
First, we have references specific to Paul celebrating or encouraging celebration of the holy days of the Mosaic Law.
We have at least three possible explanations:
1. The Classical Christian Interpretation
By submitting to observance of the Mosaic Law, the Galatians were accepting, yet again, weak and worthless elementary principles. In other words, the Mosaic Law constitutes these weak and worthless principles. Paul believes followers of Christ do not have to obey the law, and if they do, they are walking on dangerous ground. “Days, months, seasons, and years,” under this interpretation, refer to the weekly Sabbath, new moon festivals, annual festivals (such as Passover, Feast of Weeks, and Feast of Tabernacles), and Sabbatical years.
In one sense, this interpretation seemingly fits the context, as Paul has been discussing the law throughout Galatians, including its purpose and its misuse by the Judaizers. However, this interpretation drastically falls short when one considers what the New Testament tells us about Paul.
First, we have references specific to Paul celebrating or encouraging celebration of the holy days of the Mosaic Law.
For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he might not have to spend time in Asia, for he was hastening to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the day of Pentecost (Acts 20:16).
The day of Pentecost is Shavuot, the Feast of Weeks (Deuteronomy 16:9-12). It is one of the festivals of the Mosaic Law, and here, Paul is eager to return to Jerusalem at the time of this feast. (See also 1 Corinthians 16:8 for another reference to Paul and Pentecost.)
In Paul's first letter to the Corinthian church, he explains the significance of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
In Paul's first letter to the Corinthian church, he explains the significance of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Corinthians 5:6-8, emphasis ours).
Here Paul does not speak against observing this feast. On the contrary, he directs the Corinthian church to understand and practice the true meaning of the feast in their everyday lives.
Each of these references seems to indicate that Paul indeed kept the feast days of the Torah. Moreover, and perhaps most telling of all, the book of Acts describes Paul's observance, not just of the feast days, but of the entire law. In multiple places in the book of Acts, Paul is falsely accused of speaking against the law. In Acts, James even says that though the Jews say such things against Paul, these are false, and that Paul lives in observance of the law (Acts 21:24). If Luke accurately recorded the events in Acts, and we believe he did, then false accusations must have truly been false, and James truly must have said that Paul observed the Mosaic Law. This leaves us with a few options concerning Galatians: either Paul was a hypocrite who claimed to observe the Mosaic Law and taught against it at the same time OR Paul is not a hypocrite and never speaks against the law, not even in Galatians.
2. The “Paganism” Explanation
Another possible explanation as to what the elementary principles of the world refers to is that the Galatian believers were, on the one hand submitting to a false doctrine of justification by works, but at the same time, were also participating in the worship of pagan gods. The main support for this interpretation is that the Galatians:
The idea is that the Galatians at one time worshipped false gods, and now apparently some were again participating in worship of false gods. Under this interpretation, the “days, months, seasons, and years,” would refer to the holy days of the pagan gods, of which there were many. The possibility that some of the Galatians were worshiping both the true God and idols is not far-fetched from a historical perspective. Throughout time, people have practiced syncretism, mixing worship of God with pagan practices (for some biblical examples, see Exodus 32, 1 Kings 12:26-33, and 1 Corinthians 10:14-22). Syncretism was expressly forbidden by God (Deuteronomy 12:30-31). Historically, Israel suffered the curses of the law for doing such things.
On the other hand, such an explanation does not seem to fit the context of Galatians as a whole, where Paul primarily addresses the Galatians' relationship to the law and their submission to the false teachings of the Judaizers. As Fung says,
Each of these references seems to indicate that Paul indeed kept the feast days of the Torah. Moreover, and perhaps most telling of all, the book of Acts describes Paul's observance, not just of the feast days, but of the entire law. In multiple places in the book of Acts, Paul is falsely accused of speaking against the law. In Acts, James even says that though the Jews say such things against Paul, these are false, and that Paul lives in observance of the law (Acts 21:24). If Luke accurately recorded the events in Acts, and we believe he did, then false accusations must have truly been false, and James truly must have said that Paul observed the Mosaic Law. This leaves us with a few options concerning Galatians: either Paul was a hypocrite who claimed to observe the Mosaic Law and taught against it at the same time OR Paul is not a hypocrite and never speaks against the law, not even in Galatians.
2. The “Paganism” Explanation
Another possible explanation as to what the elementary principles of the world refers to is that the Galatian believers were, on the one hand submitting to a false doctrine of justification by works, but at the same time, were also participating in the worship of pagan gods. The main support for this interpretation is that the Galatians:
- at one time did not know God and worshipped (were enslaved to) false gods (4:8).
- now are “turning back again” to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, which enslave them once more (4:9).
The idea is that the Galatians at one time worshipped false gods, and now apparently some were again participating in worship of false gods. Under this interpretation, the “days, months, seasons, and years,” would refer to the holy days of the pagan gods, of which there were many. The possibility that some of the Galatians were worshiping both the true God and idols is not far-fetched from a historical perspective. Throughout time, people have practiced syncretism, mixing worship of God with pagan practices (for some biblical examples, see Exodus 32, 1 Kings 12:26-33, and 1 Corinthians 10:14-22). Syncretism was expressly forbidden by God (Deuteronomy 12:30-31). Historically, Israel suffered the curses of the law for doing such things.
On the other hand, such an explanation does not seem to fit the context of Galatians as a whole, where Paul primarily addresses the Galatians' relationship to the law and their submission to the false teachings of the Judaizers. As Fung says,
Some interpreters see here a reference to (presumably pagan) 'astrological superstitions,' 'astronomical calculations,' or astronomically oriented calendar observances of certain Jewish apocalyptic circles. The difficulty with this view is that it does not account for Paul’s view of the observances as submission to the Jewish law (4:21) (192).
While Fung shows that some scholars hold to the paganism explanation, he feels that such an explanation does not take into account the overall context of Galatians. While the explanation from paganism may be a plausible interpretation, especially considering historical tendencies toward syncretism, we agree with Fung that it seems out of place contextually in Galatians.
3. The False Teachings/Traditions of Men Explanation
This third explanation argues that the elementary principles of the world refer to false teachings and traditions from man (as opposed to true teachings from God). Galatians 4:8-9 is explained in the following way:
Though the specifics of the belief systems were drastically different, Paul connects the worship of pagan gods with the works-based system the Judaizers were teaching by saying that both are false; both are based on traditions of man and not God. Both lack dependence on the saving work of Christ. Remember that stoicheia in the Greek can have the sense of elementary forms of religion and/or teachings with demonic influence. Thus, Paul would be saying that both systems (false-god worship before conversion AND accepting of works-based religion after conversion) are elementary, inadequate, and not from God.
This explanation has contextual support from Galatians. Paul has already spent considerable time contrasting the teachings that come from man versus the teachings that come from God (especially in Galatians one and two, where this is a major theme, but throughout the whole of Galatians as well). He has stressed that the Judaizers' teaching was from man and not God, and that their teaching enslaves (Galatians 2:4). As Fung states,
3. The False Teachings/Traditions of Men Explanation
This third explanation argues that the elementary principles of the world refer to false teachings and traditions from man (as opposed to true teachings from God). Galatians 4:8-9 is explained in the following way:
- Before coming to know Christ, the Galatians were enslaved to false gods (a false teaching, not from God).
- Now that they know Christ, they are again returning to false teachings and traditions from man, not from God.
Though the specifics of the belief systems were drastically different, Paul connects the worship of pagan gods with the works-based system the Judaizers were teaching by saying that both are false; both are based on traditions of man and not God. Both lack dependence on the saving work of Christ. Remember that stoicheia in the Greek can have the sense of elementary forms of religion and/or teachings with demonic influence. Thus, Paul would be saying that both systems (false-god worship before conversion AND accepting of works-based religion after conversion) are elementary, inadequate, and not from God.
This explanation has contextual support from Galatians. Paul has already spent considerable time contrasting the teachings that come from man versus the teachings that come from God (especially in Galatians one and two, where this is a major theme, but throughout the whole of Galatians as well). He has stressed that the Judaizers' teaching was from man and not God, and that their teaching enslaves (Galatians 2:4). As Fung states,
The Galatians had been slaves to the stoicheia in the form of heathenism; now they were desiring to enslave themselves again to the stoicheia, and to commence them anew in the form of Judaism (192).
While Fung uses “Judaism” to refer to the Torah, we must remember that the Judaism of Paul's age was not Torah-based but included the teachings of man that were added to God's Word, such as the Oral Law. This is exactly what Paul is addressing in Galatians. Pauline scholar C.E.B. Cranfield says that stocheia in Galatians 4:3 and 4:9 refers “...not to the law itself, but to the legalistic misunderstanding and misuse of it” (860). The Judaizers had come in and taught that works were required for salvation, yet God says this nowhere in his Word. This is an added teaching of man, a misuse of the law, just as harmful as worship of false gods! Why is this? Because when you listen to man-made teachings over and against the Word of God, you put men in the place of God to determine what is right, what customs or religious practices to observe, and so on. As Esser states, “Thus 'the elements of the world' cover all the things in which man places his trust apart from the living God revealed in Christ; they become his gods, and he becomes their slave” (453). This will become all too apparent when we look at Paul's midrash of Hagar and Sarah.
The view that stoicheia refers to false teachings and traditions from man has support, not only contextually from Galatians, but also from Colossians two, the other place where Paul uses this phrase.
The view that stoicheia refers to false teachings and traditions from man has support, not only contextually from Galatians, but also from Colossians two, the other place where Paul uses this phrase.
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ... And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him...If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations — “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used) — according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh (Colossians 2:8;13-15;20-23, emphasis ours).
While the situation specific to the Colossians passage is different than that of Galatians, Paul uses the term stoicheia tou kosmou (here translated “elemental spirits of the world”) in a similar way. First, note in Colossians the word stoicheia is translated “spirits,” which gives more of the demonic/spiritual sense of the word. This is also supported by verse fifteen, which refers to the disarming of rulers and authorities. Second, there is a clear connection between “elemental spirits” and the teachings of man. Paul refers to human tradition (8), human precepts and teachings (22), and self-made religion (23). Paul is stressing that the stoicheia are not from God, but are false teachings of man.
In light of this understanding of stoicheia, let's reexamine the classical interpretation of the elementary principles of this world, which says they are the Mosaic Law. Could we possibly say that obeying God's instructions given in the Torah is a false teaching of man? From whom did these commands originate, God or man? Are they not God's instructions? To say the Torah had its origin in man is false. However, obeying God's instructions given in the Torah as a prerequisite for salvation is a teaching of man. God nowhere commands obedience first, then salvation. In fact, every example in the Bible, Old Testament included, shows that God saves by his grace first, and then calls his people to walk according to his Word. In fact, doing any kind of work in order to be saved is a teaching of man, not God. Why? Because it is reliance upon self, rather than reliance upon God. That is exactly what Paul has been combating throughout his letter to the Galatians. He cries again and again, through a variety of ways, “You are not justified by your works! Not by works of the Torah! Not by works of the Oral Law! Not by circumcision! Not by any works! Justification is by trusting in the work of Christ alone! Do not give in to the man-made teaching of works-based salvation!”
After examining all three explanations, explanation three is the most supported interpretation of stoicheia, both within Galatians, and in Colossians as well. How, then, does explanation three offer insight into Galatians 4:10, where Paul chides the Galatians for their observation of days, months, seasons, and years? There are a couple of options. One is that the Judaizers were requiring observation of these special holy days, again, as a prerequisite for salvation. This, of course, is another teaching of man, as God does not require his children to start observing these holy days before they can be saved. Remember the Israelites – they were first redeemed from slavery and then given God's instructions. They did not have to obey the Torah for a set time before God would rescue them from their Egyptian oppressors. The same is true of all his children. He saves us first, through faith alone, by his grace. Then he instructs us and we walk in obedience.
The other option is that the Judaizers were requiring observation of these days in a manner that followed man-made traditions. As an example, recall our discussion of the Essene sect of Judaism from chapter two. These same Essenes who taught that one was reckoned as righteous based on works, also had their own distinct calendar from the rest of Judaism regarding festival observation. Not only did they follow their own calendar, which was solar-based as opposed to lunar (whereas the calendar in the Torah is lunar) but they also included the additions of mandatory extrabiblical festivals (Abegg, Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation, 319). Thus we have an example of a Jewish sect that made changes and additions to the festivals as detailed in the Mosaic Law, and then commanded their observation in this specific manner. Perhaps the Judaizers were also requiring the Galatians to observe the festivals in a specific manner, outside of what is prescribed in the Torah. Regardless of which option is correct, the conclusion is the same: the Galatians were wrongly following man-made teachings, contrary to the teachings of God, and thus Paul feared he labored in vain (4:11).
In summary of Galatians 4:8-11, we know that the elementary principles of the world cannot refer to obedience to the Torah, for its origin was God and Paul himself obeyed it, even keeping the Sabbath, festivals, vows, and sacrifices. A possible alternative is that the elementary principles refer to syncretism within the Galatian church, in which believers worshipped both the true God and false gods, or worshipped the true God through the customs and traditions they had previously used to worship their false pagan gods. However, while there has been a historical tendency towards syncretism, this does not fit the overall context of Galatians, which is discussing the law and the Judaizers' misuse of works. A third alternative is that the elementary principles refer to the false teachings and traditions of man, of demonic origin. This is supported by the context of both Galatians and Colossians, where the phrase is also used. With this understanding, Paul does not speak against observation of the law, but rather speaks against the man-made teaching that one is justified by this observance. This third understanding is most reasonable and accounts for the specific context of Galatians, but is also consistent with the wider New Testament writings.
The Hagar-Sarah Analogy (4:21-31)
In this section, Paul gives an analogy based on the story of Hagar and Sarah to show the Galatians that legalistic observation of the law leads to slavery and that the inheritance (eternal life) cannot be obtained through our own works of the flesh. He begins by saying,
In light of this understanding of stoicheia, let's reexamine the classical interpretation of the elementary principles of this world, which says they are the Mosaic Law. Could we possibly say that obeying God's instructions given in the Torah is a false teaching of man? From whom did these commands originate, God or man? Are they not God's instructions? To say the Torah had its origin in man is false. However, obeying God's instructions given in the Torah as a prerequisite for salvation is a teaching of man. God nowhere commands obedience first, then salvation. In fact, every example in the Bible, Old Testament included, shows that God saves by his grace first, and then calls his people to walk according to his Word. In fact, doing any kind of work in order to be saved is a teaching of man, not God. Why? Because it is reliance upon self, rather than reliance upon God. That is exactly what Paul has been combating throughout his letter to the Galatians. He cries again and again, through a variety of ways, “You are not justified by your works! Not by works of the Torah! Not by works of the Oral Law! Not by circumcision! Not by any works! Justification is by trusting in the work of Christ alone! Do not give in to the man-made teaching of works-based salvation!”
After examining all three explanations, explanation three is the most supported interpretation of stoicheia, both within Galatians, and in Colossians as well. How, then, does explanation three offer insight into Galatians 4:10, where Paul chides the Galatians for their observation of days, months, seasons, and years? There are a couple of options. One is that the Judaizers were requiring observation of these special holy days, again, as a prerequisite for salvation. This, of course, is another teaching of man, as God does not require his children to start observing these holy days before they can be saved. Remember the Israelites – they were first redeemed from slavery and then given God's instructions. They did not have to obey the Torah for a set time before God would rescue them from their Egyptian oppressors. The same is true of all his children. He saves us first, through faith alone, by his grace. Then he instructs us and we walk in obedience.
The other option is that the Judaizers were requiring observation of these days in a manner that followed man-made traditions. As an example, recall our discussion of the Essene sect of Judaism from chapter two. These same Essenes who taught that one was reckoned as righteous based on works, also had their own distinct calendar from the rest of Judaism regarding festival observation. Not only did they follow their own calendar, which was solar-based as opposed to lunar (whereas the calendar in the Torah is lunar) but they also included the additions of mandatory extrabiblical festivals (Abegg, Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation, 319). Thus we have an example of a Jewish sect that made changes and additions to the festivals as detailed in the Mosaic Law, and then commanded their observation in this specific manner. Perhaps the Judaizers were also requiring the Galatians to observe the festivals in a specific manner, outside of what is prescribed in the Torah. Regardless of which option is correct, the conclusion is the same: the Galatians were wrongly following man-made teachings, contrary to the teachings of God, and thus Paul feared he labored in vain (4:11).
In summary of Galatians 4:8-11, we know that the elementary principles of the world cannot refer to obedience to the Torah, for its origin was God and Paul himself obeyed it, even keeping the Sabbath, festivals, vows, and sacrifices. A possible alternative is that the elementary principles refer to syncretism within the Galatian church, in which believers worshipped both the true God and false gods, or worshipped the true God through the customs and traditions they had previously used to worship their false pagan gods. However, while there has been a historical tendency towards syncretism, this does not fit the overall context of Galatians, which is discussing the law and the Judaizers' misuse of works. A third alternative is that the elementary principles refer to the false teachings and traditions of man, of demonic origin. This is supported by the context of both Galatians and Colossians, where the phrase is also used. With this understanding, Paul does not speak against observation of the law, but rather speaks against the man-made teaching that one is justified by this observance. This third understanding is most reasonable and accounts for the specific context of Galatians, but is also consistent with the wider New Testament writings.
The Hagar-Sarah Analogy (4:21-31)
In this section, Paul gives an analogy based on the story of Hagar and Sarah to show the Galatians that legalistic observation of the law leads to slavery and that the inheritance (eternal life) cannot be obtained through our own works of the flesh. He begins by saying,
Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? (21)
What does Paul mean when he says, “[Y]ou who desire to be under the law?” Paul has already stated what we “come under” when we seek to be justified through our own works: the curse of the law (3:10). When Paul here refers to those under the law, he is talking about those who seek to be justified through their own works, and who therefore are cut off from God and the inheritance he promises through the Messiah. This is consistent with his usage of “under the law” in other parts of Galatians and in Romans. Justification (not) by works is the major theme of Galatians. Paul is addressing those who trust in works to gain the inheritance that God freely gives. One might rephrase this passage to say, “Tell me, you who desire to be justified through your own works, what does the law say?”
Here, Paul will use the Torah itself to show that seeking salvation through works of the flesh leads to bondage, and the inheritance is only received through the promise of God, by his grace. In the manner of his upbringing, Paul will midrash a teaching from the Torah to make his point. Recall from our discussion on Romans chapter ten that a midrash is an interpretation or extrapolated teaching of the Hebrew scriptures, whereby one shows the deeper and often hidden layer of meaning to the text. Here Paul will use the story of Hagar and Sarah to show that justification by works only amounts to slavery, whereas the promise of God leads to the inheritance.
Here, Paul will use the Torah itself to show that seeking salvation through works of the flesh leads to bondage, and the inheritance is only received through the promise of God, by his grace. In the manner of his upbringing, Paul will midrash a teaching from the Torah to make his point. Recall from our discussion on Romans chapter ten that a midrash is an interpretation or extrapolated teaching of the Hebrew scriptures, whereby one shows the deeper and often hidden layer of meaning to the text. Here Paul will use the story of Hagar and Sarah to show that justification by works only amounts to slavery, whereas the promise of God leads to the inheritance.
For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise (4:22-23).
The story of Hagar and Sarah is found in Genesis 16 through 21. God promised Abraham that, although he and his wife Sarah were childless, from him would come a multitude of nations. However, for many years Sarah remained barren. Not seeing the promise fulfilled, they decided to have an heir by Abraham marrying Sarah's maidservant, Hagar (Genesis 16:3). Soon after, Hagar conceived and bore Abraham a son, whom they named Ishmael. Yet God said that the promised son would not be Ishmael, but rather would be the son that Sarah would bear in one year's time, and he would be named Isaac (Genesis 17:20-21). God fulfilled this promise, and Sarah, though previously barren, gave birth to a son a year later and named him Isaac.
In this story, the following occurs:
Starting in verse 24, Paul begins to show the layers of meaning behind this story, which apply to the Galatians (and us today!):
In this story, the following occurs:
- God promises Abraham an heir, through whom would come a multitude of nations.
- Abraham and Sarah try to receive the heir through their own works, by Abraham marrying another woman (Hagar), who bore him a son through the flesh, since Sarah was barren.
- God says that the promised heir was not Hagar's son (offspring of the works of the flesh), but rather would come from Sarah, although she was barren. It would be by the power and grace of God that she would conceive.
Starting in verse 24, Paul begins to show the layers of meaning behind this story, which apply to the Galatians (and us today!):
Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written,“Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband” (4:24-27).
Before we unpack this passage, take note of the themes of promise, heir/inheritance, works, and slavery. Paul has been discussing these very issues throughout his letter to the Galatians. Again and again, he has stressed that salvation, our inheritance in Christ, comes through the promise of God. In contrast, seeking the inheritance through works leads to slavery. Remember what Esser observed above, “Thus 'the elements of the world' cover all the things in which man places his trust apart from the living God revealed in Christ; they become his gods, and he becomes their slave” (453, emphasis ours).
In verse 24, Paul states that Hagar and Sarah each represent two covenants. Hagar represents the covenant from Sinai, which is the Law of Moses. Paul says this covenant bears children for slavery. What does Paul mean by this? Could he mean that to obey the Law of Moses is to put yourself in slavery? This is a critical question, for many have used these very passages to teach that we do not need to obey the Torah, some going so far as to say we should not obey the Torah, for if we do, we will find ourselves in bondage.
Context is critical here or we will arrive at faulty conclusions and faulty application. Remember that Hagar represents achieving the promise through Abraham's own works, as opposed to relying on and trusting in God to bring about his promise of life through death (a living child through a dead womb – something humanly impossible). Paul is not saying that we are free to disobey the Torah. Rather, he is saying that we must not rely on our works, even our obedience to God's Torah, to achieve the inheritance. Salvation comes by way of the promise; it is God's gift to us, and cannot be earned or achieved through our own works, even if they are good, obedient works. They do not and cannot save.
Therefore, when Paul says that Hagar represents the covenant from Sinai, which bears children for slavery, he is talking about wrongly using the covenant for salvation. This is completely in line with what Paul has already stated: “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse” (Galatians 3:10a). Relying on works of the law leads to the curse of God.
At the risk of redundancy, we say this again: The Mosaic Law was never intended to be a means of salvation. God says the following about this covenant:
In verse 24, Paul states that Hagar and Sarah each represent two covenants. Hagar represents the covenant from Sinai, which is the Law of Moses. Paul says this covenant bears children for slavery. What does Paul mean by this? Could he mean that to obey the Law of Moses is to put yourself in slavery? This is a critical question, for many have used these very passages to teach that we do not need to obey the Torah, some going so far as to say we should not obey the Torah, for if we do, we will find ourselves in bondage.
Context is critical here or we will arrive at faulty conclusions and faulty application. Remember that Hagar represents achieving the promise through Abraham's own works, as opposed to relying on and trusting in God to bring about his promise of life through death (a living child through a dead womb – something humanly impossible). Paul is not saying that we are free to disobey the Torah. Rather, he is saying that we must not rely on our works, even our obedience to God's Torah, to achieve the inheritance. Salvation comes by way of the promise; it is God's gift to us, and cannot be earned or achieved through our own works, even if they are good, obedient works. They do not and cannot save.
Therefore, when Paul says that Hagar represents the covenant from Sinai, which bears children for slavery, he is talking about wrongly using the covenant for salvation. This is completely in line with what Paul has already stated: “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse” (Galatians 3:10a). Relying on works of the law leads to the curse of God.
At the risk of redundancy, we say this again: The Mosaic Law was never intended to be a means of salvation. God says the following about this covenant:
The LORD called to [Moses] out of the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel” (Exodus 19:3b-6, emphasis ours).
God first redeemed the Israelites from the land of slavery. He “saved” them, not because they somehow earned or attained it through their obedient works, but because of God's promise that he would do it (Exodus 3:16-17). God promised, and he was true to his Word. When he gives the law to Moses, he says, “Now therefore...” (Exodus 19:5). Obedience to God's commands follows redemption. It is in light of redemption: salvation first, then an obedient response. The works are not part of attaining salvation, they are part of the response, a life lived in service to God. Of course, we cannot claim the promise while acting in rebellion (we cannot continue in sin that grace may abound). Paul strongly warns against this in 1 Corinthians 10:1-12 and Romans 11:21.
Verse 25 gives further support to the idea that Paul is not combating obedience to the Torah, but rather obedience for the purpose of salvation: “Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.” Hagar and the law are related to the present Jerusalem. “The present Jerusalem” refers to first-century Judaism, which had a focus on external works for salvation. Consider what Fung says in his commentary on Galatians 4:25:
Verse 25 gives further support to the idea that Paul is not combating obedience to the Torah, but rather obedience for the purpose of salvation: “Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.” Hagar and the law are related to the present Jerusalem. “The present Jerusalem” refers to first-century Judaism, which had a focus on external works for salvation. Consider what Fung says in his commentary on Galatians 4:25:
Representing Mount Sinai in Arabia, then, Hagar corresponds to the earthly Jerusalem of Paul’s day,which was in spiritual bondage together with her children just as Hagar was in physical bondage with her child Ishmael. Thus the fact of bondage (albeit in two different senses) holds together Hagar and Ishmael, the Sinaitic covenant of law, the present earthly Jerusalem (which stands by metonymy for Judaism, with its trust in physical descent from Abraham and reliance on legal observance as the way of salvation), and her children, that is, all who adhere to the law as the means of justification and the principle of life (208-209, emphasis ours).
First-century Judaism was in bondage because many of the Jews wrongly trusted in their election (“I am redeemed because I am physically descended from Abraham”) as well as their observance of the law (“I am saved by my obedient works”), instead of in the promise of God to redeem them through the promised Seed, that is Christ. Studying the gospels shows the legalism that entrapped the religious leaders of that time. Rules were meticulously followed while the heart of these rules was ignored (“their heart is far from me ... teaching as doctrine the commandments of men,” Matthew 15:8-9). Additional “commandments of men” were added to those that God gave his people, and religious leaders required obedience to these as well. As we saw in chapter two with the 4QMMT documents, some Jewish sects like the Essenes taught justification by works. The idea of justification by works is a teaching of men, not of God.
Paul then contrasts the present Jerusalem in bondage with the Jerusalem above that is free (26). What is this Jerusalem that is above? Consider what Longenecker says in his commentary on this passage:
Paul then contrasts the present Jerusalem in bondage with the Jerusalem above that is free (26). What is this Jerusalem that is above? Consider what Longenecker says in his commentary on this passage:
The idea of a “heavenly Jerusalem” (“the Jerusalem that is above”) has a rich Jewish background. The concept has to do with the culmination of God’s redemptive purposes in human history, the realization of God’s reign in its totality. As such, it is an eschatological concept that describes Jerusalem as it will be at the end of time, often in contrast to what the city is at present (213-214).
There are many references to the concept of a heavenly Jerusalem in the Old Testament scriptures, Jewish wisdom literature, second temple period apocalyptic writings, and in rabbinic literature (ibid, 214). Further, this idea of a heavenly Jerusalem that corresponds to the earthly Jerusalem is prevalent in the New Testament writings, in particular in Hebrews and Revelation. Again, Longenecker says,
This concept of a “heavenly” or “new” Jerusalem also epitomized the hopes of Jewish Christians, as in Heb 11:10, 14–16; 12:22; 13:14; and Rev 3:12; 21:2, where the full realization of God’s kingdom and Christ’s reign is set out in terms of a “heavenly” or “new” Jerusalem that was looked forward to by the patriarchs and is now experienced by Christians in inaugurated fashion (ibid).
First-century Christians had the hope of a heavenly Jerusalem, of which they were now part, though it had not been fully realized in an eschatological sense (Revelation 21). Consider how the writer of Hebrews connects Abraham and Sarah's story to this future hope of the heavenly city (also, take note of the themes of faith, inheritance, promise, and heirs that are also rich in Galatians):
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore. These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city (Hebrews 11:8–16, emphasis ours).
The “Jerusalem above that is free” is therefore a reference to the place of which all believers are citizens, the city that God has prepared for us. Just as Abraham went in to the land of promise by faith, so we enter the heavenly city promised to us, not through our works, but by faith in the Son of God. This Jerusalem is not in bondage, as the earthly one is, where its inhabitants are enslaved to a works-based righteousness and commandments of men. The Jerusalem above, like Sarah, is free, because it is not based on works but rather on the promise of God.
One other critical thing Paul states about this city is that it is “our mother” (26), or “the mother of us all” (NKJV). There are a few ideas we should note here. First, if the heavenly Jerusalem, which corresponds to the promise given to Abraham and Sarah, is our mother, then she precedes us. She is not something new, but rather is something that already exists. Hebrews 12:22-24 says,
One other critical thing Paul states about this city is that it is “our mother” (26), or “the mother of us all” (NKJV). There are a few ideas we should note here. First, if the heavenly Jerusalem, which corresponds to the promise given to Abraham and Sarah, is our mother, then she precedes us. She is not something new, but rather is something that already exists. Hebrews 12:22-24 says,
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel (emphasis ours).
It is something believers have come to, something that is already there which they are now a part of (cf. Ephesians 2:12-22). The heavenly Jerusalem represents a promise that was in place before the Sinaitic covenant. Remember what Paul said earlier in Galatians 3:17:
This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.
The Mosaic covenant does not annul the Abrahamic covenant, in which we receive the inheritance through the promise. The Mosaic covenant cannot step in, change what was previously established by God, and offer a new way through which we are saved. If this is how we understand it, then we incorrectly understand the purpose of the Mosaic covenant. It was not a way to achieve salvation. It was a way of life after a person was redeemed by faith in the promise of God.
Second, Sarah is the mother of us all, Jew and Gentile alike, who have been united in Christ. Paul is restating what he has already said:
Second, Sarah is the mother of us all, Jew and Gentile alike, who have been united in Christ. Paul is restating what he has already said:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise (Galatians 3:28–29, emphasis ours).
There, he said we are Abraham's offspring; here he says “Sarah” (representing the heavenly Jerusalem) is the mother of us all. We are not children of Abraham and Sarah by genetics, but by faith. The children of Abraham and Sarah are and always have been by faith. Jesus himself supports this when he tells those who claim they are Abraham's children, that they are not because they do not do the work of Abraham (John 8:39). The work of Abraham is having a trusting faith in God, for he believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness (Genesis 15:6). Paul tells us in Romans that those who “walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had” (Romans 4:12) are the children of Abraham. What an encouragement to the Gentile Galatian believers, who were not being treated as sons of Isaac, and what a shock to the Judaizers! Ironically, it was those who were genetically descended from Isaac (the Judaizers) who were spiritually following in the footsteps of Ishmael. Thus, at this point, Paul quotes Isaiah, saying,
Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband (Galatians 4:27).
We, in Christ, are the children of the desolate one. Sarah, who was barren, is our mother, and we are her spiritual offspring. Therefore, it is not those who attempt to receive the inheritance through works that are Abraham and Sarah's children, but rather those who trust in the promise of God to bring life from death. This does not mean they should disobey God's commands just as Abraham did not (Genesis 26:15); it means they are not saved by them.
Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman (Galatians 4:28–31).
Paul affirms that the Galatian believers are indeed children of Abraham and Sarah, members of the heavenly Jerusalem. Then he reminds them of how Ishmael, son of Hagar, persecuted Isaac, son of Sarah. In other words, the one born out of an attempt to achieve the inheritance of God through human works, persecuted the one who was born out of faith in the promise of God. Paul shows that this is exactly what is happening among the Galatians. The Judaizers were saying the inheritance of God was received through works of the flesh, yet this has never been the case. What is Paul's, or rather, the Torah's, direction? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman” (30). The Galatians must not listen to the false gospel of the Judaizers. Justification is not by works. They must cast out that teaching.
Again, if we take this verse out of context, we might claim that Paul is saying we are to cast out the Torah, the Mosaic Law. Yet the entire context of Galatians is that justification (salvation, the inheritance, the promise, etc.) is not by works but by faith. This is what Paul is saying to cast out, this false teaching of man, this attempt at gaining the inheritance through your own works, just as Abraham first attempted to do through Hagar. If Paul is saying for us to cast out the Torah, then we are to cast out the very teaching that he is using to show that the promise is received not by works but by faith, for the story of Hagar and Sarah is found in the law. Remember, Paul said this himself: “Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law?” (21, emphasis ours), and then Paul goes on to explain just what the law, or the Torah, actually teaches: justification is not by works but by faith in the promise of God.
No, we are not to cast out the law; we are to obey the law and listen to the law, and thereby cast out the false teaching of man that justification is by works. We can never let ourselves come to believe that we can in-debt God to us, or that God owes us, or that we can bring about the promise of God through our effort. But we must not misrepresent Paul's teaching to mean we no longer need to keep God's commandments.
Again, if we take this verse out of context, we might claim that Paul is saying we are to cast out the Torah, the Mosaic Law. Yet the entire context of Galatians is that justification (salvation, the inheritance, the promise, etc.) is not by works but by faith. This is what Paul is saying to cast out, this false teaching of man, this attempt at gaining the inheritance through your own works, just as Abraham first attempted to do through Hagar. If Paul is saying for us to cast out the Torah, then we are to cast out the very teaching that he is using to show that the promise is received not by works but by faith, for the story of Hagar and Sarah is found in the law. Remember, Paul said this himself: “Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law?” (21, emphasis ours), and then Paul goes on to explain just what the law, or the Torah, actually teaches: justification is not by works but by faith in the promise of God.
No, we are not to cast out the law; we are to obey the law and listen to the law, and thereby cast out the false teaching of man that justification is by works. We can never let ourselves come to believe that we can in-debt God to us, or that God owes us, or that we can bring about the promise of God through our effort. But we must not misrepresent Paul's teaching to mean we no longer need to keep God's commandments.