GALATIANS: Set Free to Be Free

After four chapters of pretty direct argument for these Gentile believers, we have taken a visual look at Paul’s arguments. While the context of Galatia is incredibly foreign to us, hopefully we have a better understanding of the argument Paul is making. Whether or not the Jews should follow the law is not up for discussion. This was never a problem for the New Testament community. It was obvious to them that Jews would carry the miqsat ma’asay haTorah — that was their role in the world and had been for generations.

The fiery debate was whether or not the Gentiles were free from that calling. Paul has made it quite clear to the Gentile believers in Galatia that if they cave into the pressure of converting to Judaism, they would be destroying the gospel (particularly for that region at that point in time). They needed to be walking billboards for the good news of Jesus and the inclusion of all people into the family of God. Now that we have this understanding for the book of Galatians, listen to one of the more popular passages from the letter:

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

You were running a good race. Who cut in on you to keep you from obeying the truth? That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. “A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough.” I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty. Brothers and sisters, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

Suddenly the ending of the letter swings into context and has clarity that we didn’t appreciate before. Paul’s argument through the whole letter has been that they, as Gentiles, have been called to be free from the miqsat ma’asay haTorah; it is this very freedom that shows the world what the gospel is. In the same way that the Jews have been called to be set apart for the work of God in the world, the Gentiles have been set apart in freedom to make clear to the world that everybody is invited! If they let themselves be yoked to a system of rules, the Gentiles lose the essence of their call.

For many of my readers (Gentiles), it is important to realize your freedom from the “works of the Law” is essential to the body of Christ putting the gospel on display. You must observe that freedom, celebrate that freedom, and use that freedom well — use that freedom to show the world what God is like!

But some will cry that this freedom is just a license for sin; it’s a free-for-all promoting a “nothing-really-matters-and-everybody-is-invited” universalism. But this isn’t the case and it’s where Paul turns his attention next.

You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Paul says that in order to use your freedom to show the world the risen Christ, you cannot use it for self — you must use it for others. This, by the way, happens to be (according to Jesus) the very essence of the Law itself. This is what the “pedagogue” was supposed to teach us from the beginning. Torah showed us how to walk according to the Spirit and not our own fleshly desires.

Of course this raises a question: Fine, Paul, but how do I know if I’m doing that right? If there is no law for me to follow and I’m to walk in freedom, how do I know if I’m walking according to the flesh or the Spirit? Paul will say (sounding strangely like Jesus when he does) that the test case for your walk is the fruit it produces.

The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Paul says it’s obvious to know when you are walking in the Spirit. If the product of your walk is anger, rage, debauchery, division, and a lack of self-control, you are using your freedom for yourself. But if what’s coming out of your life is love and joy, peace and patience, kindness and goodness… well, those can only come from one place.

Jews, we have been called to show the world what it means to walk according to the Spirit of God; not according to the flesh and our every desire, but how to use our desires appropriately to “bless all nations.”

Gentiles, you have been called to freedom later in the story; now that we all know what faithfulness looks like, you are invited to take those principles of grace and extend them to everyone that you meet.

But in Christ, neither one of our calls is a call for self. Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female — we are all called to lay our lives down for the other. To pray for our persecutors. To love our enemies. The world could use a model of grace, love, forgiveness, mercy, and hospitality. 

And I think it should start with a group of people who do that — Jew and Gentile — together.

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 Pedagogue

We are left with this nagging question: If God’s story has always been about the promise and not the Law, why then would God have given the Law in the first place?

Paul moves on to answer this very question.

Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one.

Paul immediately says there was something about how the promise of God had to be realized through the seed. However, until that day could come, the Law was given to a mediator. I always see and hear a reference to Moses as God’s mediator between God (whom Paul says is one party) and His people.

Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

One might notice how essential this reading is to make this chapter of Galatians consistent. For many who have felt as though we were stretching the logic of “the law is not based on faith,” you may now see the dilemma created if we presume such a statement means the Law runs contrary to faith. In fact, Paul is intentional when he points out that the Law is not opposed to the promises of God. However, if a law could accomplish the same thing as a promise, it would have been given at the beginning. But it cannot; instead, the Law was given for a supplementary purpose that helped the promise of God find its culmination in the Seed.

Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Paul now introduces a new concept to the teaching. The English here uses harsh language, such as “custody” and “locked up,” making the reader think of prison. In fact, this is not the case at all. The Greek word Paul uses for “guardian” is paidagogos and translates as “pedagogue.” Understanding this idea will make the teaching from Paul explode with relevant meaning.

Many of us (like myself when I first heard the term) may be completely unfamiliar with the term ‘pedagogue’; others may have heard it before. In our western context, the idea of a ‘pedagogue’ is usually the idea of a teacher (the KJV translates this as “schoolmaster”). But in the first century, the idea of a pedagogue was much different than that of a teacher. The pedagogue was a guardian (hence the translation) who was hired when a young individual came upon his or her inheritance (for any number of reasons) before they were old enough to claim that inheritance legally. For example, if we had an 8-year-old boy come upon his inheritance because of the death of his father, he would be too young to legally see his inheritance realized. There would be a pedagogue hired to serve as the boy’s guardian. This role is not the role of teacher; it is the role of protector. It is the pedagogue’s responsibility to see to it that the boy arrives at his inheritance safely and is able to realize its consummation.

Paul just said the Law was given because the time had not yet come for the promise to be realized through the Seed. In the meantime, God needed a guardian who would help get his people to the place where they could realize the consummation of God’s promise. It was the pedagogue of God’s people. But now that faith has come — now that the promise has been realized — there is no need for a pedagogue. Once the child matured, he would lay claim to his inheritance and the role of the pedagogue would be complete.

Paul’s larger point is now that we know God’s promise has been realized (“all nations will be blessed through you”; i.e., salvation has come to the Gentiles), we would no longer subject ourselves to being led by a guardian. The inheritance of Abraham has been claimed. Now, some would use this same logic to argue the Jews should now come out from under the pedagogue and quit following the Law as well, but this would be to take Paul’s teaching metaphor and pull it out of its context, applying it in a way he never intended (this is clear through references to Paul’s kosher lifestyle throughout the New Testament). Lancaster elaborates on this point well in his book.

Now that we have some key context, let’s finish this key section.

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

What I am saying is that as long as an heir is underage, he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate. The heir is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. So also, when we were underage, we were in slavery under the elemental spiritual forces of the world. But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship. Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.” So you are no longer a slave, but God’s child; and since you are his child, God has made you also an heir.

Knowing the context now makes this teaching come to life. It is no longer riddled with confusion. God has brought the story to its day of inheritance. We now see the promise of God find its fulfillment and the whole world being invited to redemption.

So now we must turn our attention to what is happening with these Galatian theosabes and their desire to usurp God’s promise.