Gálatas 4

Gálatas 4

Lenski says: It has been well said that, although he is at a loss because he is so far away from the Galatians, the fertile mind of Paul, in his attempt to separate them from all legalism, finds another effective mode of approach. From personal appeal he turns to a clear case that is recorded in Scripture, which is illustrative of both bondage and freedom, the account of Hagar and Ishmael and of Sarah and Isaac. To the subjective and personal Paul thus adds the Scriptural and objective. (See context The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians) Martin Luther - Here Paul would have closed his Epistle because he did not know what else to say. He wishes he could see the Galatians in person and straighten out their difficulties. But he is not sure whether the Galatians have fully understood the difference between the Gospel and the Law. To make sure, he introduces another illustration. He knows people like illustrations and stories. He knows that Christ Himself made ample use of parables. (Galatians Commentary) Wiersbe introduces this last section (Gal 4:21-31) - Since the Judaizers appealed to the Law, Paul accepts their challenge and uses the Law to prove that Christians are not under the Law. He takes the familiar story of Ishmael and Isaac (Gen. 16–21) and draws from it basic truths about the Christian’s relationship to the Law of Moses. The events described actually happened, but Paul uses them as an allegory, which is a narrative that has a deeper meaning behind it. Perhaps the most famous allegory in the English language is John Bunyan’s A Pilgrim’s Progress, in which Bunyan traces Christian’s experiences from the City of Destruction to heaven. In an allegory, persons and actions represent hidden meanings, so that the narrative can be read on two levels: the literal and the symbolic. Paul’s use of Genesis in this section does not give us license to find “hidden meanings” in all the events of the Old Testament. If we take that approach to the Bible, we can make it mean almost anything we please. This is the way many false teachings arise. The Holy Spirit inspired Paul to discern the hidden meaning of the Genesis story. We must always interpret the Old Testament in the light of the New Testament, and where the New Testament gives us permission, we may search for hidden meanings. Otherwise, we must accept the plain statements of Scripture and not try to “spiritualize” everything. (See context in Be Free Galatians or borrow Be Free: An Expository Study of Galatians) Ridderbos says: So far as the tone of the writing goes, the conclusion of Chapter 4 differs strikingly from what has gone before. The affecting and strongly personal quality of verses 12 to 20 gives way to a more objective argument. In it, Paul once more, and now for the last time, sheds light on the great theme: the law and the gospel. (pp 172-3) (from A Practical Study of GALATIANS:) Vos says: From personal appeal Paul now turns to an illustration from Scripture in an effort to separate the Galatians from legalism. Those who boast of their submission to the law and claim to be sons of Abraham forget that Abraham had two sons, the one of a freewoman and the other of a bondwoman. Blessing and inheritance belong to the former. Paul declares the legalistic Galatians to be descended from the latter. (See context in Galatians: A Call to Christian Liberty) Ray Pritchard introduces his sermon non Gal 4:21-31 with these comments - Almost all the commentators agree that this is the hardest passage in the book of Galatians. It’s not easy to understand on a quick reading exactly what Paul means to say. Or perhaps more accurately, we know in general terms what he is trying to say; it’s how he says it that trips us up. For that reason, many people skip right over these verses so they can get to the “good stuff” in chapter 5, especially the part about the fruit of the Spirit in 5:22-23. And I must admit that this passage does sound very strange to our ears. Paul’s form of argument is very Jewish, even Rabbinical, which means that his first-century readers probably had no problems following him, but that same style can seem rather cold and clinical to 21st-century readers. To make matters more challenging, there are parts of this passage that we understand and parts that seem to make no sense at all. Most of us know something about Abraham and Sarah and we probably know something about Hagar and Ishmael as well. But what are we to make of a verse like this? “Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children” (Galatians 4:25). It’s not quite clear how Paul gets from Hagar to Mount Sinai to Jerusalem to a woman enslaved with her children. You don’t hear very many sermons on that verse. I’ve never known anyone to choose Galatians 4:25 as his life text. Yet it’s in the Bible, so it must be true and there must be a message that we need to hear...He is addressing people who want a hybrid religion that is part Jewish and part Christian. They intend to believe in Jesus plus they want to live under the law as a means of pleasing God and winning his favor. Everything in this passage is aimed at these confused believers who were sorely tempted (ED: THEY WERE GENTILES WHO WERE BEING ENTICED BY JUDAIZERS) to go under the Law of Moses. His point is, Have you considered the implications of what you are about to do? Seen from that background, this passage slowly comes into focus. He is arguing (from an Old Testament point of view) with people who want to take Jesus with them and go back to an Old Testament way of life. But you can’t do that. You can have the law as a way of life (ED: OF COURSE IT IS NOT REALLY LIFE FOR IT IS A CURSE WHAT BRINGS DEATH - Gal 3:13) or you can have Jesus, but you can’t have both. (A Tale of Two Women: Are You a Child of Promise?)