Galati 3:15 Commento

The apostle in this chapter, I. Reproves the Galatians for their folly, in suffering themselves to be drawn away from the faith of the gospel, and endeavours, from several considerations, to impress them with a sense of it. II. He proves the doctrine which he had reproved them for departing from - that of justification by faith without the works of the law, 1. From the example of Abraham's justification. 2. From the nature and tenour of the law. 3. From the express testimony of the Old Testament; and, 4. From the stability of the covenant of God with Abraham. Lest any should hereupon say, "Wherefore then serveth the law?" he answers, (1.) It was added because of transgressions. (2.) It was given to convince the world of the necessity of a Saviour. (3.) It was designed as a schoolmaster, to bring us to Christ. And then he concludes the chapter by acquainting us with the privilege of Christians under the gospel state.

INTRODUCTION TO GALATIANS 3 In this chapter the apostle reproves the Galatians for their disobedience to the Gospel, and departure from it; confirms the doctrine of justification by faith, by various arguments; shows the use of the law, and the abrogation of it, and makes mention of several privileges which belong to believers in Christ. He begins with a sharp reproof of the Galatians, and represents them as foolish and bewitched, and charges them with disobedience to the truth of the Gospel, which is aggravated by the clearness of the Gospel ministry, in which a crucified Christ, and justification by him, had been so evidently set before them, Gal 3:1, and by the fruit and effect of it, they having received the Spirit by it, and not by the preaching of the law of works, Gal 3:2 and it still increased their folly, that whereas they had begun with the Spirit of God, and set out in a dependence on him and his grace, they seemed now as if they would end in a carnal and legal way, Gal 3:3. To which is added, the consideration of their having suffered many things for the sake of the Gospel, which must be suffered in vain should they relinquish the Gospel, though the apostle hoped otherwise of them, Gal 3:4, nay, they had not only received through the preaching of the Gospel the Spirit, and his graces, but even extraordinary gifts attended it, for the confirmation of it, Gal 3:5, so that this case of theirs was a very aggravated one, and they were guilty of great folly and madness: from hence the apostle passes to the main thing in dispute, the great truth of justification by faith in the righteousness of Christ, which these persons were departing from, and which he establishes by several arguments; and first from the instance and example of Abraham, who was justified by faith, as appears from that which he believed, being imputed to him as his justifying righteousness, Gal 3:6, and as many as are believers in Christ are his spiritual children, and so undoubtedly are justified the same way their father was, Gal 3:7, and particularly that the Gentiles are justified by faith is clear from the preaching of the Gospel to Abraham, and the promise made unto him, that in his seed all nations should be blessed; that is, with the blessing of justification, Gal 3:8. The conclusion of which instance and example is, that as faithful Abraham was blessed with a justifying righteousness through faith, so all that believe are blessed along with him with the same blessing, Gal 3:9, and that no man can be justified by the works of the law is certain, since the law is so far from justifying any on account of obedience to it, that it pronounces a curse upon all that do not perfectly and constantly fulfil it, Gal 3:10. And this is still further evident from a passage in the prophecy of Hab 2:4 which declares, that the just live by faith, or that those who are truly righteous are such who are justified by it, Gal 3:11. And this is illustrated by the law and faith being contrary; for if a just man lives by faith, then not by the law, for the law does not direct a man to believe, but to work, and to live by his works, Gal 3:12. And the apostle having spoken of the law as a cursing law, takes the opportunity of showing how believers are delivered from the curse of it, which is done by Christ's being made a curse for them; and that he was, appears from his being crucified and hanged on a tree; the ends of which were, that the same blessing of justification Abraham had, might come upon the Gentiles through Christ, and that they might by faith receive the promise of the Spirit, Gal 3:13 so that it is clear from hence, that the blessing of justification is through Christ's being made a curse, and is received by faith, and is not by the works of the law. The apostle next argues from the inheritance being by covenant, testament, or promise, and therefore not by the law: he observes, that a man's covenant or testament, when confirmed, can neither be disannulled, nor have anything added to it, and much less can the covenant or testament of God, confirmed of him in Christ, be disannulled by the law, or the promise in it be made of none effect by that which was several hundred years after a declaration of it to Abraham, to whom, and to whose seed, the promises were made; so that it unavoidably follows, that since the inheritance or blessing of life is by promise, as is clear from its being given to Abraham by promise, then it is not of the law, Gal 3:15. And whereas an objection might arise, if this be the case, of what use and service can the law be? to what purpose, or for what end, was that given? The apostle answers, that it was added because of transgressions; and that it was to endure until Christ should come, to whom the promise was made; and accordingly it was published in a very grand and solemn manner by angels, and was put into the hands of a mediator, Moses, who stood between God as one party, and the people of Israel as another, Gal 3:19. Moreover, as it might be further objected, that, according to this way of reasoning, the law is against the promises; the apostle replies in a way of detestation and abhorrence of any such thing, and by an argument from the insufficiency of the law to justify, since it cannot give life, Gal 3:21. And then proceeds to point out another use of the law, which is to conclude men under sin, or convince men of it, that they, seeing their need of righteousness and life by Christ might receive the promise of it through faith in him Gal 3:22, and so far were men from being justified by the law under the former dispensation, that they were kept under it as in a garrison, and shut up in it as in a prison, until Christ, the object of faith, was revealed, and released them, Gal 3:23, and was moreover as a rigid and severe schoolmaster; and so it continued until the times of Christ; and these therefore being the uses of the law, it is a clear case that justification is by faith, and not by that, Gal 3:24. Besides, Christ being now come, the Jews themselves are no more under this law as a schoolmaster; it is now abolished, and therefore there is no justification by it, Gal 3:25. And that this is the case of true believers in Christ is evident, because such are the children of God, and are taught and led by the Spirit of God, and are free, and not under the law as a schoolmaster, Gal 3:26. Besides, as they are baptized into Christ, they have put him on, as the Lord their righteousness, and so profess to be justified by him, and him only, Gal 3:27, and these, let them be of what nation, sex, state, and condition soever, are all one in Christ, and are all justified in one and the same way; and being Christ's they are Abraham's spiritual seed, and so heirs of the same promise of righteousness and life as he, Gal 3:28.

Brethren,.... Whereas in Gal 3:1, he calls them "foolish Galatians", which might seem too harsh and severe, therefore, to mitigate and soften their resentments, he styles them brethren; hoping still well of them, and that they were not so far gone, but that they might be recovered; and imputing the blame and fault rather to their leaders and teachers, than to them: I speak after the manner of men; agreeably to a Talmudic form of speech in use among the Jews, , "the law speaks according to the language of the children of men", or "after the manner of men" (b), when they argue from any Scripture, in which a word is repeated, and the latter word seems to point out something peculiar: but the apostle's meaning is, that the thing he was about to speak of was taken from among men, in common use with them, and what was obvious to the common sense and understanding of men, and might easily be applied and argued from, as it is by him: though it be but a man's covenant, or testament, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth or addeth thereto; if a covenant made between men, or a man's will and testament, be confirmed, signed, sealed, and witnessed, in a proper manner, no other man can make them void, or take anything from them, or add anything to them, only the parties concerned by their own will and consent; and if this be the case among men, much less can the covenant of God, confirmed by two immutable things, his word and oath, or his will and testament, or any branch of it, be ever disannulled, or be capable of receiving any addition thereunto. The apostle seems to have a particular respect to that branch of the covenant and will of God, which regards the justification of men in his sight by the righteousness of Christ, to which the false teachers were for adding the works of the law. (b) T. Bab Ceritot, fol. 11. 1. Bava Metzia, fol. 94. 2. Sanhedrin, fol. 90. 2. Maccot, fol. 12. 1. Vid Halicot Olam, tract 4. c. 3. p. 199.

"But," says he, "I speak after the manner of men: when we were children, we were placed in bondage under the elements of the world." This, however, was not said "after the manner of men.

For (with respect to the latter clause of this passage), what child (in the sense, that is, in which the Gentiles are children) is not in bondage to the elements of the world, which he looks up to in the light of a god? With regard, however, to the former clause, there was a figure (as the apostle wrote it); because after he had said, "I speak after the manner of men," he adds), "Though it be but a man's covenant, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." For by the figure of the permanency of a human covenant he was defending the divine testament.

"To speak after the manner of men" means to use human examples. Having founded his argument on the Scriptures, on the miracles wrought among themselves, on the sufferings of Christ, and on the Patriarch, he proceeds to common usages; and this he does invariably, in order to sweeten his discourse, and render it more acceptable and intelligible to the duller sort. Thus he argues with the Corinthians, "Who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof?" and again with the Hebrews, "For a testament is of force where there hath been death; for doth it ever avail while he that made it liveth?" One may find him dwelling with pleasure on such arguments. In the Old Testament God does the same thing in many instances, as, "Can a woman forget her sucking child?" and again, "Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?" and in Hosea, He represents a husband set at nought by his wife. This use of human examples frequently occurs in types also, as when the prophet takes the girdle, and goes down to the potter's house. The meaning of the present example is, that Faith is more ancient than the Law, which is later and only temporary, and delivered in order to pave the way for Faith. Hence he says, "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men;" above he had called them "foolish," now he calls them "brethren," at once chiding and encouraging them. "Though it be but a man's covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed." If a man, says he, makes a covenant, does any one dare to come afterwards and overturn it, or subjoin aught to it? for this is the meaning of "or addeth thereto." Much less then when God makes a covenant; and with whom did God make a covenant?

The apostle, who was “made all things to all men” … is also made a fool for the Galatians, whom he a little while before called fools. For he does not employ the arguments that he used with the Romans but simpler ones and such as the stupid could understand.… [He means,] “What I am about to say I say not according to God. I do not speak with regard to the deepest wisdom and those who can eat solid food but with regard to those who feed on milk because of the tenderness of their stomachs.”

(V. 15 seqq.) Brothers, I speak in human terms: yet no one rejects or adds to a man's covenant, which has been confirmed. The promises were made to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say, 'and to seeds,' referring to many, but referring to one, 'and to your seed,' who is Christ. Now I say this: the covenant, which was confirmed by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate the promise, so as to abolish it. For if the inheritance is based on the law, it is no longer based on a promise. But God gave to Abraham a promise. The Apostle, who became all things to all people in order to gain everyone, is a debtor to Greeks and Barbarians, to the wise and the foolish, even to the Galatians whom he had just called foolish. For he did not use the same arguments with them as he did with the Romans, but simpler ones; things that even fools could understand and almost from the street corner. And so that it would not seem that he did it out of ignorance and not skill, he appeases the wise reader beforehand, and he tempers what he is going to say with a preface: Brothers, I speak as a human being. For what I am about to say, I do not speak according to God: I do not speak according to hidden wisdom, and those who can eat solid food, but according to those who are nourished by the tender milk of the stomach, and are unable to bear great things. (1 Corinthians 5). Therefore, to the Corinthians, among whom fornication was heard, and such fornication that even among the Gentiles, he says: I speak, and not the Lord. (1 Corinthians 7:12). And to the same in the second [letter]: What I am saying, I do not speak according to the Lord, but as if in foolishness (II Cor. XI, 17). Some think that when he is about to discuss examples from the testament of a man and the death of the testator and other things of human similarity, he said: Brothers, I say according to man: although it seems to me, and for this reason indeed that they think, but especially because of what follows being stated (or promised), namely: He does not say 'and to seeds' as if in many, but as if in one, and to your seed, which is Christ. While traversing all the scriptures in meaning and memory, I have never found the seed of writing in the plural number, but whether in a positive or negative sense, it is always in the singular number. Furthermore, the following is inferred: But I say that this testament is confirmed by God, if anyone diligently compares the Hebrew volumes and other editions with the translation of the Septuagint interpreters, they will find where the testament is written, not to sound like testament, but a covenant, which is called 'Berith' in the Hebrew language. Therefore, it is clear that the Apostle did what he promised, and he did not use hidden meanings to the Galatians, but rather everyday and lowly things that could displease the prudent (I speak in human terms unless I add this). To calculate the years from the time when the Lord spoke to Abraham, saying, 'And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed' (Genesis 22:18), until the lawgiver Moses: whether they are four hundred and thirty, or how the Lord promises to Abraham in Genesis that his descendants shall come out of the land of bondage after four hundred years. For it is not a small matter, and sought after by many, I do not know if it was invented by someone else. Also, that which is read in the same book about Thamar and her two little ones (Genesis 38), that is, that the first one called Zara extended his hand, and the midwife tied a scarlet thread on it, and then, as he pulled his hand back inside, the hand of the one named Phares was extended in its place. It is fitting that this demonstrates how Israel, in the work of the Law, extended his hand and contracted it, polluted by the blood of the prophets and of the Savior himself. But afterwards, the people of the Gentiles burst forth, because of whom it is often said to have been destroyed, and the middle wall that had been between the Jews and the Gentiles was broken down, so that there would be one flock and one shepherd, and there would be glory, and honor, and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. However, the simple meaning that is hidden in this passage has this force, that the Apostle teaches that the promises that were made to Abraham cannot be destroyed by the Law, which was given afterwards, and that the later things cannot take priority over the earlier ones, since the promises were given to Abraham four hundred and thirty years before, so that all nations would be blessed in him. But the observation is, that whoever had done it, would live in it, after four hundred and thirty years Moses gave it on Mount Sinai. On the contrary, this could be said: Why then was it necessary to give the Law after so much time of promise, when even with the Law given, the suspicion of a broken promise could arise, and the Law given would not be profitable while the promise remained? The Apostle, foreseeing this question, poses and explains it to himself in the following, saying:

The value that a testator’s death has for confirming his testament is final, since he cannot then change his mind. This is the value that the immutability of God’s promise has in confirming the inheritance of Abraham, whose faith was reckoned for righteousness.

Since from the signs given by them, and from the revealing of the Holy Spirit, and from the cross of Christ, and from those things by which Abraham was saved, faith was shown to save, and not the law; now he seeks to persuade them by a human example. For the phrase "according to men" stands for "according to a human argument and example." And he rightly calls them brothers, having called them foolish. For it is necessary sometimes to rebuke sharply, and sometimes to soften. "a human-confirmed covenant." See what he wishes to prove by the example of the covenant. "I will bless," says God to Abraham, "and in his seed shall all the nations be blessed." (Gen. 22:18) Now the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh, is Christ. The law was given four hundred and thirty years later. If then, he says, the law committed the blessings and righteousness, the promise and the covenant of God to Abraham become void. But a man's covenant no one annuls; and the covenant of God is annulled, and it lasted a long time, namely four hundred and thirty years. For if that one promised to bless through Christ, but the law instead of Christ blesses, then the covenant of God to Abraham is annulled. — [PHOTIUS] "Which he says has been confirmed." For it was authorized by an oath. And he says precisely, "has been confirmed." For the nullified thing is also transferred, just as the law itself, into the Gospel. It is ordered additionally, that is, it adds on. [end of the excerpt by Photius] —

He called them foolish above, but now he calls them brothers—there restraining, and here consoling. I am going to present you, he says, a human example. Paul wants to show that faith is a covenant more ancient than the law, and that it would be unjust to prefer the law over it. He brought an example to illustrate this. If, he says, a man made a testament, would anyone, coming afterward, dare to pervert it or alter it, that is, add anything to it? All the more must this be understood in relation to God.

Having proved by authority that the Law does not justify and is not necessary for justification, which is through faith, the Apostle then proves the same point with human reasons. Concerning this he does four things: First, he mentions a human custom; Secondly, he touches on a divine promise (v. 16); Thirdly, he draws his conclusion (v. 17); Fourthly, he shows that the conclusion follows from the premises (v. 18). He says therefore: It is clear that up to now I have been speaking according to the authority of Sacred Scripture, which came not by the will of man, but by the Holy Spirit, as is said in 2 Peter (1:21). But now "I speak after the manner of man" and after the manners which human reason and human custom follow. Here, indeed, we have an argument to show that in discussions bearing on faith, we may use any truth of any science: "If thou seest in the number of the captives a beautiful woman and lovest her and wilt have her to wife, thou shalt bring her into thy house," i.e., if you are pleased with worldly wisdom and science, bring it within your boundaries, "and she shall shave her hair, and pare her nails," i.e., you shall cut away all erroneous opinions (Deut 21:11). This is why in many places in his epistles the Apostle uses the authority of the Gentiles; for example: "Evil communications corrupt good manners" (1 Cor 15:33), and "The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slothful bellies" (Tit. 1:12). Or: although such reasons be fruitless and weak, because, as is said in Psalm 93 (v. 11): "The Lord knoweth the thoughts of men, that they are vain," yet a man's "testament, if it be confirmed, no one despiseth nor addeth to" it, because nothing human has as much power to bind as a man's last will. But someone would be scorning it if he were to say that a man's will, confirmed by his death and by witnesses, had no validity. Therefore, if no one scorns a testament of this kind by saying that it should not be heeded or by modifying it, much less may anyone scorn the testament of God or modify it and weaken it by adding or removing anything: "If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life" (Rev 22:18); "You shall not add to the word that I speak to you, neither shall you take away from it" (Deut 4:2).

The apostle inquires how they could be so foolish as to renounce the Gospel of Christ and turn back to the law, after having heard, received, and suffered so much for the Gospel, Gal 3:1-5. Asserts the doctrine of justification by faith, on the example of Abraham, Gal 3:6-9. Shows that all who are under the law are under the curse, from which Christ alone redeems us; and the promise made to Abraham comes to the Gentiles who believe, Gal 3:10-14. For the covenant is not by the works of the law, but by promise, Gal 3:15-18. The law was given to show the sinfulness of sin, and to act as a schoolmaster till Christ should come, Gal 3:19-25. It is by faith only that any become children of God, Gal 3:26. And under the Gospel, all those distinctions which subsisted under the law are done away; and genuine believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, are one in Christ Jesus, and accounted the genuine children of Abraham, Gal 3:27-29.

I speak after the manner of men - I am about to produce an example taken from civil transactions. If it be confirmed - If an agreement or bond be signed, sealed, and witnessed, and, in this country, being first duly stamped; No man disannulleth - It stands under the protection of the civil law, and nothing can be legally erased or added.

REPROOF OF THE GALATIANS FOR ABANDONING FAITH FOR LEGALISM. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH VINDICATED: THE LAW SHOWN TO BE SUBSEQUENT TO THE PROMISE: BELIEVERS ARE THE SPIRITUAL SEED OF ABRAHAM, WHO WAS JUSTIFIED BY FAITH. THE LAW WAS OUR SCHOOLMASTER TO BRING US TO CHRIST, THAT WE MIGHT BECOME CHILDREN OF GOD BY FAITH. (Gal. 3:1-29) that ye should not obey the truth--omitted in the oldest manuscripts. bewitched--fascinated you so that you have lost your wits. THEMISTIUS says the Galatians were naturally very acute in intellect. Hence, Paul wonders they could be so misled in this case. you--emphatical. "You, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been graphically set forth (literally, in writing, namely, by vivid portraiture in preaching) among you, crucified" (so the sense and Greek order require rather than English Version). As Christ was "crucified," so ye ought to have been by faith "crucified with Christ," and so "dead to the law" (Gal 2:19-20). Reference to the "eyes" is appropriate, as fascination was supposed to be exercised through the eyes. The sight of Christ crucified ought to have been enough to counteract all fascination.

I speak after the manner of men--I take an illustration from a merely human transaction of everyday occurrence. but a man's covenant--whose purpose it is far less important to maintain. if it be confirmed--when once it hath been ratified. no man disannulleth--"none setteth aside," not even the author himself, much less any second party. None does so who acts in common equity. Much less would the righteous God do so. The law is here, by personification, regarded as a second person, distinct from, and subsequent to, the promise of God. The promise is everlasting, and more peculiarly belongs to God. The law is regarded as something extraneous, afterwards introduced, exceptional and temporary (Gal 3:17-19, Gal 3:21-24). addeth--None addeth new conditions "making" the covenant "of none effect" (Gal 3:17). So legal Judaism could make no alteration in the fundamental relation between God and man, already established by the promises to Abraham; it could not add as a new condition the observance of the law, in which case the fulfilment of the promise would be attached to a condition impossible for man to perform. The "covenant" here is one of free grace, a promise afterwards carried into effect in the Gospel.