ROMANS: Trusting in the Promises of God

Now that Paul has suggested righteousness comes from faith, apart from observing the miqsat ma’asay haTorah, he needs to be able to make this case from the Torah and show this is the case in the Scriptures, not just a new idea. In the same fashion as Galatians, Paul turns to the the “father of faith” and where the story began, with the story of Abraham.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Paul says Abraham knew this inherent truth to be true in his own walk of righteousness. Paul states that if Abraham earned his justification from his works, he would be able to boast. It is here where Paul begins using a metaphor based on labor and wage. When a person works, they get a paycheck. If Abraham was justified because of his works, then he earned the justification and he would be able to boast in his successful campaign to work for justification. Paul then says if a person simply trusts in the promises of God, that trust (faith) is “credited” to them as righteousness. The term credited can also be rendered as “reckoned” and refers to a settling of books.

Paul is working off of the same verse in Genesis 15 he used with the Galatians. Genesis told us Abraham had faith and it was reckoned to his account as righteousness. He believed he was accepted by God and was a member of God’s family by promise — that faith in the promise was just as effectual as if he had walked righteously.

Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. And he is then also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also follow in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Paul keeps pushing his point to make it relevant to those Gentiles who find themselves in the church of Rome. This belief, this faith cannot be reserved only for the circumcised, for Abraham experienced all of this before he was circumcised. This justification and the crediting of righteousness has to be available independently of circumcision. In this way, Abraham becomes the father of faith for the uncircumcised.

Paul’s point is that this faith is accessible and available to all — circumcised and uncircumcised.

It’s the same God. It’s the same promise. It’s the same faith.

They receive the same justification.

If Paul started his letter by saying all of humanity struggled with the same problem, he goes on to say all of humanity enjoys the same redemption.

Paul reiterates his point:

It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

Abraham partnered with God before he was circumcised, before there was a Law, before there was a single command to follow. This means people cannot rely on the fact that they are obedient to God’s Law for their partnership and acceptance. As Paul stated in the first three chapters, nobody lives up to the standard, whether it’s God’s standard or their own. We all know we fall short and live under a cloud of wrath. Paul suggests we should trust the story instead.

Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.

That is one of my favorite lines in Romans 4. …the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.

We are invited to trust the story of a God who gives life where death reigns and calls things out of what isn’t there. As we learned in Galatians, we are not righteous, but if we trust in the love and grace of God, He says we are righteous — even when we are not.

…calls into being things that were not.

Abraham understood this. Even though it goes against that which we believe to be most true about ourselves, even though it seems incredibly counterintuitive, Abraham believed that when God said it, it must be true.

Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead. Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. This is why “it was credited to him as righteousness.” The words “it was credited to him” were written not for him alone, but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

And we too are invited into this same promise and hope. We are invited to believe God feels the same way about all of us. If we believe in this same truth and story, we find we have incredible peace and the joy of a cleansed conscience that is freed from that dark cloud of a curse we carry around.

Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

It’s because of God’s love and acceptance — unmerited, unearned, undeserved, but true of God nonetheless — we can celebrate in our redemption. Not only this, but the same truth continues to overflow into other areas as well. We have a new perspective in the midst of suffering; if we are loved and valued, my suffering doesn’t raise the same set of doubts it did about God’s anger and doubts about my acceptance before Him.

In fact, our sufferings have the tendency to become teaching tools. They teach us about perseverance. Our perseverance is used by God to shape character in our lives. Our character is then used by God to bring us hope.

Ultimately, the hope is that God really is who He says He is, and that we really are who God says we are: loved, valued, accepted, redeemed.

And this hope does not disappoint, because somewhere in our bones, at our deepest level, through the work of the Holy Spirit, we know God’s love to be true.

As Jonathan Martin puts it in Prototype:

I believe there was a time in your life, sometime before you succumbed to the constant busyness, noise, and distraction of our world, when you knew something of the loving presence of God. There was a time (perhaps associated with a place) when you knew—or at least suspected—that you were infinitely loved. In other words, I believe you have heard from God, and that you probably know a lot more about hearing from God than you might realize.

GALATIANS: ...Two Covenants

Before we move toward the closing of the letter to the Galatians, let’s take a visual look at the world of biblical covenants and try to place Paul’s arguments in their context with pictures.

The first thing we need to be able to see is that covenants are made between two parties (for the scope of this conversation, I will not be diving into the different kinds of covenants that exist; we have talked before about Suzerain-vassal covenants and I have recommended The Epic of Eden by Sandra Richter in order to get introduced to the ideas). This idea seems like a no-brainer, and yet I find it is the one thing we seem to lose track of in the conversations surrounding covenantal theology. The covenant applies to the parties that make it.

With this in mind, the first biblical covenant that we run into is the Noahic covenant. (Some have identified the Adamic covenant, but for the sake of this conversation, we will start with Noah.) When you go back and look at the end of the story of Noah, it is clear that God makes this covenant with all of creation.

The next covenant we might identify is the Abrahamic covenant. Unlike the Noahic covenant, the parties of this covenant are more specific and defined. The Abrahamic covenant is made between God and Abraham’s descendants.

By extension, the rest of Abraham’s descendants will fall under the same Abrahamic covenant.

Just to make sure we are following along with our reasoning, let’s check a few test cases, starting with Esau. Is Esau under the Noahic covenant? Yes; the Noahic covenant is between God and all of creation. Is Esau under the Abrahamic covenant? Yes; he is Abraham’s grandson. The same would apply to Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, and any other descendants from Abraham (i.e., through Keturah). Let’s try someone else. What about Nahor, the brother of Abraham? Is Nahor under the Noahic covenant? Yes; every human being (and animal, for that matter) is under the Noahic covenant. Is Nahor under the Abrahamic covenant? No; he is not a descendant of Abraham.

Hopefully all of that makes sense, as it’s time to add the next layer. Eventually, Jacob will have twelve sons who will become a nation and will stand at the bottom of Mount Sinai and enter into what we call the Mosaic or Sinai covenant.

Just to make sure we’re tracking, let’s run some test cases here. Are the Jews under the Sinai covenant? Yes, of course. Are descendants of Esau under the Sinai covenant? No, they were not present at Sinai. The two parties present at Sinai were God and the descendants of Jacob/Israel.

What throws the Jewish world of the New Testament into chaos is the introduction of the God-fearing Gentiles (or the theosabes).

The Gentiles are clearly under the Noahic covenant, and there is no debate about that (even today, a Gentile could attend a Jewish synagogue service and bless them and their story by referring to himself as a ben Noah, or a “son of Noah”). The question is what to do when they want to become a part of the family. Many Jews in the first century would have argued that, covenantally, God is working through the Jewish people, so the Gentiles need to take on circumcision (and the Law it represents) and fall under the Sinai covenant.

But Paul’s argument is revolutionary. He uses Genesis 15 to claim that the Abrahamic covenant is not based on circumcision, but on faith. He also argues that God’s story has always been about God’s promises. The promise has always preceded the Law and the story of God has never been about the Law that was introduced 430 years after the promise. This means that it is faith that makes one a member of the Abrahamic covenant. He then argues that Gentiles who have faith in the promises of God are b’nei Abraham, or “sons of Abraham.” This claim in Galatians is revolutionary, for it says that a Gentile who lives by faith in the promises of God is MORE than a “son of Noah.” He/she is an adopted “son of Abraham.”

By extension, it becomes clear through the visuals that a Jew would not cease to be a Jew. All descendants of Israel entered into an everlasting covenant with God that remains intact within God’s larger story. What Paul’s gospel does is ensure those Torah-observant lives find their proper place and their priestly calling within God’s narrative. The reality of Jesus and the resurrected Christ does not change their calling in the world, but it does invite a whole bunch of adopted children into the family of God — children who have their own unique calling within the family. This is where we turn our attention to next.

I find that putting Paul’s argument into pictures can help our mechanical, western minds grasp the argument Paul is making. Paul is saying that the issue of God’s story cannot be the Law. The Law was given for its own purposes (to be the “pedagogue”) within the larger story, but the story is about the promises of God. He is insistent that circumcision cannot be the marker of God’s covenant with Abraham, because Abraham was justified before he was ever circumcised. Abraham was justified by faith; faith is what it means to be a true descendant of Abraham.

GALATIANS: Two Women...

After Paul’s exasperated statement about being perplexed, he again returns to questioning these Gentile believers who are wanting to convert to Judaism. He wants to know why, from a theological standpoint, they would seek to submit themselves to living under the law as Jews. He also makes his case on their own turf, claiming the very Law they seek to live under speaks against their current reasoning.

Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? 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.

Paul then launches into discourse built on an allegory. It is a parable of sorts, using pictures and images to make his point. Paul tells us clearly that this is what he is doing:

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.”

Paul takes the story from Genesis about Abraham and his two wives (Hagar and Sarai) and uses it as the template for his allegorical parable. He explains that each woman had children:  One woman bore children who were born into slavery, and the other woman had children who were free because they were born of the promise of God. He connects Hagar to the Sinai covenant and the present city of Jerusalem (I believe it’s obvious that Paul is referring to the ‘circumcision party’ from the Jerusalem church). However, Sarah represents a greater truth, a greater narrative — it’s the narrative of promise and is the “Jerusalem from above.”

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.

Paul then says that these Gentile believers (notice how he now calls them “brothers,” having made the case that through faith they are members of God’s household) are allegorically children of Isaac, because they were born spiritually of the promise of God. But in the story, God told Abraham that he was to let Hagar go, for he had to build his story upon his promises.

Let’s sit and appreciate what Paul just did from a rabbinical standpoint, because it was brilliant.

All throughout the letter, Paul has been building a case that the Gentiles do not need to live under the miqsat ma’asay haTorah because they are justified by faith. His main passage for arguing the case has been the story of Abraham, and primarily Genesis 15–17. Paul then decides to use an allegorical picture to bolster his case. Instead of simply creating a picture to suit his needs for a teaching, Paul draws a picture from an actual biblical story! That would be stunning in and of itself, but the story Paul chooses isn’t just any story — it actually makes the theological point he’s arguing for AND it is pulled from the very passage that has been under examination.

Incredible.

Nevertheless, Paul’s point makes sense and we could move to draw our conclusions, but I find that when we teach Paul’s argument using visuals to describe the context of Paul’s argument, it can really help many people get a grasp of the book of Galatians and how Jew and Gentile fit together with the Law. I’d like to use some diagrams to portray Paul’s argument about covenants and God’s narrative.

Before we wrap up Galatians, let’s take a look at some pictures.

GALATIANS: Perplexed

Having explained now the purpose of the Law and the calling the Jews have in the world, Paul moves on, continuing to speak to the God-fearing Gentiles who are being tempted to convert to Judaism. Having made the case that, in this new Jesus reality, everybody is a child of Abraham through faith — there is no distinction between gender, social status, or covenantal belonging — he then wants to know why they would exchange this good news for anything else.

Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Paul refers to their former days as ‘Gentile sinners’ and says they were slaves to men in this pagan, Roman world — men who thought themselves to be gods, but by nature are not gods. But now, if they choose to be burdened by this worldview of those in the ‘circumcision party,’ they will be turning to the same old situation. They will find themselves enslaved to the ways of men and not of God.

Paul then pleads with them to be open-minded and consider what he’s saying. He tells them to become like him, just as he did when he brought them the gospel. He humbled himself and met them on their turf, joining their conversation in order to express the gospel to them.

I plead with you, brothers and sisters, become like me, for I became like you. You did me no wrong. As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you, and even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. Where, then, is your blessing of me now? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Apparently, it was because of an illness that Paul spent so much time in Galatia teaching the gospel to them. He asks them to consider those days when they spent that time together. He reminds them of how well they treated him; even though he was a burden in his illness, they treated him with gracious hospitality — the hallmark of being a child of Abraham. He asked them why they have lost this posture with him. Why this change in heart? Why do they treat him differently? He is simply bringing them a reminder of the same gospel he preached before when their lives were forever changed.

Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you from us, so that you may have zeal for them. It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always, not just when I am with you. My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!

Paul refers to those in the ‘circumcision party’ and speak of their intentions. They wish to divide these God-fearing children of Abraham and make them into what they are. He says they are zealous for them in the hopes that they might become zealous for their cause of Shammai exclusivity. But exclusivity is not the gospel; it is the anti-gospel. Paul reminds them that zeal is not the problem. It is fine to be zealous about the things God is doing in the world. However, since the beginning of the story, God has been trying to bless all nations, to bring everyone back to the table. If we are zealous about that kind of inclusivity, it would be a good thing!

Now, I’m certainly not talking about some loosey-goosey universalism. Certainly, many evangelical readers will cringe and grab their pitchforks at the frequent usage of the word “inclusivity.” But it is important to realize that from the earliest days of the Christian movement, this is the heart of the gospel. The Gentiles would not be a part of the story if God had not called people like Paul to fight for the place of ALL PEOPLE within the family of God IN FAITH. I can already hear the objections: “the gospel, by its very nature, is exclusive.” If this is how you see the gospel of Jesus Christ, the New Testament says you have the wrong gospel. This does not mean truth is relative and everybody is saved and morality doesn’t matter and every other false dichotomy we try to create which is illogical in its premises.

What we mean to say is that since the beginning of the story, God has invited people to trust in His promises. If they will do this, they will find salvation, justification, and redemption. This is the gospel; it is the “gospel preached beforehand to Abraham.” It is the gospel those in the Old Testament had (see Hebrews 4), as well as the truth of the New Testament reality in Christ.

Paul’s ministry is a ministry of reminding us that these promises and this faith are available to EVERYONE. Period. There are no qualifications to getting access to this gospel.

And we struggle with the same struggles as the Galatians. We begin to create spiritual “checkpoints” people have to get through in order to access this justification. We use our understanding of morality to create new groups that sound an awful lot like the ‘circumcision party’ of old. Instead of fighting for their place in the family, we find ourselves trying to make sure everybody understands what an “outsider” they are.

And Paul reminds us of how frustrating this is to the gospel. He says he wishes he was there in person and not writing a letter so he could change his tone, yet again. Paul began his letter in astonishment (“I am astonished that you are turning…”), he moved to anger (“You foolish Galatians!”), and now finds himself perplexed. How can we do this to the good news of Jesus? How can we miss out on the truth that there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female? How can we continue to exchange this truth for the lie of “we’re in and you’re out”?

It’s perplexing.

GALATIANS: The Curse

The next section of Galatians seems to undo everything that we’ve been talking about up to this point.

For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”

At first glance, this appears to say that anyone who follows the Law is cursed. (And this has certainly been taught in far too many Christian circles!) But a closer inspection of the Text (especially when translated appropriately) reveals what Paul has just said within a Jewish context. That same phrase which refers to the “works of the Law” (remember the miqsat ma’asay haTorah, or ergu nomu in the Greek) is used here. Paul’s statement in context clearly says that those who rely on the miqsat ma’asay haTorah for their justification are under a curse. He then quotes Deuteronomy to make his case. Whenever a book is quoted like this, it is important to ask ourselves about the context of the quotation in order to understand what the author is driving at.

In the context of this Deuteronomy quote, the people of God are being reminded of their charge to carry the Law as they enter into the land God is giving them to possess. The story has the people of God being split up on two mountains; one party shouts out the commands of the Torah and the other party shouts back their agreement to follow the commands of God (see the story in Deuteronomy 27). The clear implication of Paul’s quotation is that if you are relying on the “works of the Law” for your justification, you have to live under this dark cloud that follows you everywhere you go; such reliance ends up being a curse.

Mt. Gerazim, where the people of God stood to renew their covenant

Paul continues to say (again) that we understand this, in fact, is not where justification comes from:

Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.”

This time, when Paul wants to make the case that they are justified by faith, he goes to Habakkuk for his quotation. This is a brilliant move employed by Hillel when making his arguments about justification. Hillel noted that when Habakkuk talked about righteousness, he talked about “living by emunah”; this Hebrew word for “faith” refers more to “faithfulness” and putting your faith into action. By following the Habakkuk passage with another quotation from Leviticus connecting the idea of “living by,” Paul (employing a rabbinical interpretation method called gezerah shavah, something only the most educated could do) ends up making a case that the Law is not there for our justification; it is there to teach us how to live faithfully.

I realize all of that was probably incredibly confusing, so I’ll sum up Paul’s point like this: If you try to find your justification in the “works of the Law” you will find yourself under a curse. But the Law wasn’t given to find your justification; on the contrary, the Law was given to teach you how to live by faith.

Paul continues:

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.” He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

By employing another gezerah shavah, Paul connects the idea of the curse to Jesus. By referring to Christ’s crucifixion in reference to being “hung on a pole [tree],” Paul says that when Jesus subjected himself to crucifixion, he redeemed us from that faulty way of thinking and showed us what God’s true plan is. When we properly understand where justification comes from and what God desires from that redemptive process, it opens us up to welcome the Gentiles into the family of God — not as theosabes, but as full-fledged children of Abraham.

Paul then uses an example to go back to his larger idea introduced in the last section:

Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

Paul's illustration demonstrates how he views the story of God. Just as you do not undo a covenant (we might think “contract” in our world) by entering into a new one, so this is the case with God’s story. Paul makes the point that God’s story is aboutpromise. The story of Abraham is a story about promise and not a story about Law. Just because God enters into a covenant relationship with his people through the Law over four centuries later, it does not undo the larger story of God as a story of promise. This is a story about believing in God’s promises — it always has been, and it always will be. This story is not about following rules; it’s about living by faith in the promises of God.

This will have extraordinary implications for the Gentiles.

But Paul has to explain why God would give the Law in the first place.

GALATIANS: Children of Abraham

After sharing with the Galatian believers about his confrontation with Peter and the leadership as they struggled to live in accordance to this gospel, he turns his attention to them. The same understanding of this gospel and this justification is what Paul stresses to the Galatians. This interpretation is apparently one they should have and understand.

You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh? Have you experienced so much in vain—if it really was in vain? So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?

Paul calls them foolish Galatians, which happens to be a cultural play on the region of Galatia. We mentioned before that the region of Galatia was like the backwoods corner of the Roman empire. The people there were considered barbaric, uneducated, and primitive. This is one of the regions the Shammai Jews had settled to remain unbothered by the culture around them. This play of Paul’s is a direct attack on a very educated group of people who should know better than to believe the lies they are tempted to believe. It’s safe to say that Paul is upset.

Paul asks them to think about their own experience. Was it by faith or by being Jewish (the miqsat ma’asay haTorah) they received the Spirit? They aren’t Jewish; they are theosabes who are being tempted to convert to Judaism. So the answer to all of Paul’s questions is obviously faith. It is by faith they received salvation. It is by faith they experience the Spirit. It is by faith they are justified. Their whole story has been about faith — so why would they want to give that up and make it about the “works of the law”?

And Paul also mentions their suffering being in vain. But what suffering is Paul talking about? How have these Gentile believers suffered? The answer would be at least twofold. First, they have suffered by holding a very unpopular worldview within the Jewish world of Galatia. In a corner of the Diaspora where the Jews follow the teaching of Shammai, to hold to this view — which is even more progressive than Hillel’s — would antagonize the world where you belong and make you the source of intense religious persecution. Second, they would also be the source of serious Roman persecution. Remember, if these Gentiles are not accepted by the larger Jewish community of Galatia, they will not fall under the great “Jewish Exception” and would be required to engage in emperor worship (idolatry). At different times in history, refusal to do this would be punishable by death.

Yes, these early Gentile believers have suffered a great deal, and that is why they want to convert. But Paul’s point is that this is the very story they are trying to tell to the world of Galatia. They have suffered for the sake of the gospel. If they convert now, all of that suffering will have been in vain. But it hasn’t been in vain, because the gospel has been put on display through their refusal to give in to popular opinion.

Paul then uses a typical Hillel argument to say that Abraham is their great example when it comes to being justified by faith.

So also Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

Hillel used to make the point that in Genesis 15, Abraham was justified by his faith. He was justified before he was circumcised; he was justified before he had one single rule to follow. If this is the case in Genesis 15, then Shammai is wrong; you cannot be justified by your works. Abraham was justified long before there were any works to be done. However, Paul takes this reasoning one step further than Hillel ever did. It will be helpful here to review our conversation about brothers, “children of Abraham,” and theosabes.

Paul makes the case that the gospel was announced to Abraham himself; Paul sees his gospel in the very story where God announces He is going to bless ALL nations through Abraham. Paul says if this is the story of God (the gospel, as he calls it), then what makes a person a covenant member of Abraham’s family is not circumcision. Contrary to all Jewish thought at the time, Paul says faith is the marker of being a child of God in the family of Abraham.

To a Jew, a “child of Abraham” is a proselyte — someone who has taken on circumcision and converted to Judaism. They are actually Jewish and distinct from the theosabes. But Paul’s argument is that a Gentile with faith is adopted into the family of Abraham.

For Paul, the story of God has always been about the promise, not the Law.

For Paul, the story of God has always been about being a person of faith, not about being Jewish.

For Paul, the story of God has always been about believing in the promises of God, not about obeying the rules.

For Paul, this has always been about trusting the story of God.

If a person will trust in the promises of God, then they are of the same stock as Abraham.

But what of being Jewish? Does that mean nothing?! Why did God waste all of his time with the Law?

Well the Law will certainly have its purpose, but before he tells the Galatians about that, he has to make his case about the Law and the Promise.