Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson IX)

Early church writer Ambrosiaster (335 -397 AD), feels that the term “fullness of time” also refers to the cessation of all the requirements such as circumcision and the sacrifices in the Temple, as well as the other rites and rituals. The reason for this is because the Anointed One was the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham, and Abraham was justified and considered as righteous before he and his son Isaac were circumcised. Therefore, these things served their purpose, now it was time to move on and let what the Anointed One did on the cross become the source of the believer’s justification and righteousness. Paul was amazed that the Galatians forgot what he told them and annulled their baptism and went back to advising new converts that they must be circumcised and accept all the legal laws and ceremonial laws it brings with it into their lives.^[1]

Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153 AD) earned a mixed reputation. On the one hand, he is called the “honey-tongued educator” for his eloquent writings on the love of God. On the other hand, he rallied soldiers to kill Muslims. He wrote eloquently on humility; then again, he loved being close to the seat of power and was an adviser to five popes. But not all opinions are to be taken without factoring in a certain amount of bias. In writing on the theme of what greater incentive do the Christians need to go out and preach the Gospel other than the desire for the unsaved to love God, he quotes what Paul says here in verse four about God sending His own Son when the right time came. Looking at the past as a garden, he speaks of blossoms of the Anointed One’s passion as the fruit of ages past, growing, and blooming during the epidemic of sin and death.

But for Bernard, it is the glory of the Resurrection that causes a springtime of regenerating grace, that the fresh flowers of the coming ages to spring forth, whose fruit is to be given without measure at the general resurrection, when time will be no more. And so, as it is written, “The flowers are coming through the ground. The time for singing has come. The voice of the turtle-dove has been heard in our land. ”^[2] That means, summer is back with Him who dissolves icy death into the spring of a new life and says, “Look, I am making everything new!”^[3] His Body sown in the grave blossomed in the Resurrection as Paul told the Corinthians, “Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever!”^[4] and in a similar fashion, our valleys and fields which lay barren or frozen, as if dead, now glow with reviving life and warmth.^[5] And just as the Anointed One died and was buried when the right time came so we will rise to meet Him in the air at precisely the right time.

Medieval scholar Nicholas of Lyra (1210-1270) we quoted earlier, believes that the reason Jesus was born of a woman and made subject to the Jewish legalistic rituals prevalent at the time, such as His circumcision, dedication, and study of the Torah and Mishnah, is because He wanted to abide by all the requirements of the Law so that He is allowed to point to Himself as their complete fulfillment, showing that they no longer needed to be freed from the penalty of sin in order to inherit everlasting life. He took all that upon Himself, so we could believe in what He did for us.^[6]

Catholic scholar Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) offers this exposition on that part of the passage that says the Anointed One was born of a woman. As he sees it, two errors must be avoided: Namely, that of Photinus,^[7] who said that the Anointed One was solely man and received the beginning of His existence from the Virgin; in other words, that the Anointed One was made of a woman as though He owed His beginning entirely to her. But this is false because it contradicts what Paul says: “Who was born as a person in the flesh.”^[8] he does not say, “according to His person,” which exists from eternity, namely, the hypostasis^[9] of the Son of God. In the same way, when you put a loaf of bread in the oven for baking when it begins to turn brown, it is not proper to say that the browning made the bread. It is simply a case of the browning being added to the bread. In the same way, the fact that the Son of God became flesh in Mary’s womb, it is not proper to say that the person of the Anointed One came into being. Rather, that the human nature newly given to the Anointed One did not change His original essence of divinity.

 Aquinas goes on to say that certain items affect a thing and change it, such as forms and qualities, but certain other items affect it without changing it. For instance, dipping a stick in water makes it wet but does so without changing its essence of being wood. This sort of thing indicates a relationship. That’s why our adaptation to the Word of God in us does not change the Word, but we are changed by it. That is why, in spiritual matters, we employ in temporal sense terms that signify a relationship. That way, we can say, “Lord, You are my refuge.”^[10] Or we say, God, became human. But we do not use forms and qualities so as to say: God was turned into a human.^[11]

Aquinas also made note of how the Anointed One fulfilled the precepts of the Old Law both in His works and in His teaching. In His works, because He was willing to be circumcised and to fulfill the other legal observances, which were binding for the time being; As Paul says here in verse four, the Anointed One was “made under the Law.” In His teaching, He fulfilled the precepts of the Law in three ways. First, by explaining the essence of the Law. This is clear in the case of murder and adultery, the prohibition of which the Scribes and Pharisees thought to refer only to the actual physical act. However, our Lord fulfilled the Law by showing that the prohibition extended to the thoughtful acts of sins. Secondly, our Lord fulfilled the precepts of the Law by prescribing the safest way of complying with the statutes of the Old Law. Thus, the Old Law forbade perjury: and this is safely avoided by abstaining altogether from taking an oath unless required by law. Thirdly, our Lord fulfilled the precepts of the Law, by taking aim at perfection. This is seen in what He said to the man wanting to follow Him. After the man affirmed that he kept all the precepts of the Old Law, Jesus told him, “There is one thing for you to do yet, if you want to be perfect, go and sell everything you have and give the money to poor people.”^{[12] [13]}

Dutch theologian James Arminius (1558-1609), was speaking on the Priesthood of the Anointed One and how this applied to our becoming sons and daughter of God. He is commenting on, what he calls, “The Second Fruit” of the Anointed One’s Priestly Office. This involves the asking, obtaining, and application of all the blessings available to those who are part of God’s covenant administered by the Anointed One of salvation for both the soul and the body.

This necessary blessing, says Arminius, is succeeded by adoption into sons and daughters by their right to the heavenly inheritance. We owe it to the Priesthood of the Anointed One that this blessing was requested and obtained for us by the Anointed One, as well as communicated to us by the Holy Spirit. For He being the proper and only begotten Son of the Father, and the sole heir of all His Father’s blessings, was unwilling to enjoy such surpassing benefits alone, and desired to have co-heirs and partners, whom He might anoint with the oil of His gladness, and invited to join in the glory and blessings of that inheritance. To do this, He became an offering by willfully sacrificing His life for sin, that, the painful endurance of His soul being finished, He might see His seed continue to grow in their days – the new seeds of God, so they might come into possession with Him both of name and inheritance. That’s why, says Arminius, Paul tells us here in verse five that the Anointed One was made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive “THE ADOPTION OF SONS.”^[14]

Puritan English Presbyterian minister and author John Flavel (1627-1691), preaching on the Doctrine – the death of Jesus the Anointed One, not only satisfied our debts but over and above purchased a rich inheritance for the children of God. This he called the second effect or fruit of our Lord’s priesthood. This involved our adoption as sons and daughters because born again believers received the spiritual nature of the Anointed One to be within them, so they lived because He now lived in them.

Flavel draws a comparison between “civil adoption” and “sacred adoption.” There exist a twofold agreement and disagreement between them. They agree in this that both are enacted at the pleasure and good-will of the adopter; and in this, that both procedures confer privileges on the adopted individual that was not theirs by nature. But where they disagree is that one is an act imitating nature, the other transcends nature; the one is initiated by those without any natural children; the other for the comfort of them that were without a spiritual Father.

This divine adoption is, in scripture, either taken appropriately for that act of God by which we are made sons and daughters or, seen correctly, for the privileges with which the adopted are invested. This is what Paul also wrote the Romans.^[15] We lost our inheritance by the fall of Adam; we receive it, as Paul says here in verses four and five, by the death of the Anointed One, which restores it again to us by a new and better title.^[16] It’s one thing to be born into a family and thereby expect all that the family offers to come freely to the new child. But to be forsaken as unwanted by a family and then be adopted as wanted into a family should make the new family member forever grateful.

[1] Ambrosiaster, op. cit., p. 21

[2] Song of Solomon 2:12

[3] Revelation 21:5

[4] 1 Corinthians 15:42

[5] Bernard of Clairvaux: On Loving God Ch. 3, p. 11

[6] Nicholas of Lyra, op. cit., loc. cit.

[7] Photinus was the bishop of Samnium in Pannonia (today the town of Sremska Mitrovica in Serbia) who was best known for denying the incarnation of the Anointed One.  Photinus grew up in Ancyra in Galatia.  He died in 376 AD.

[8] Romans 1:3

[9] Hypostasis is a philosophical term that identifies an underlying reality or substance not seen on the surface

[10] Psalm 89:1

[11] Thomas Aquinas, op. cit., loc. cit

[12] Aquinas combines Mark 10:21 with Matthew 19:21

[13] Ibid., Summa Theologica, op. cit. Part 2-Question 107-Answer 2, p. 1290

[14] James Arminius: Orations of Arminius, Vol. 1, Oration 1, The Priesthood of The Anointed One, Delivered on July 11, 1603, p. 31

[15] Romans 8:23

[16] John Flavel: The Fountain of Life, Sermon 15, p. 177

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson VIII)

And there was one more factor to consider, Jesus Himself says that no one should think that He came to do away with the Law of Moses or the writings of the early prophets. He did not come to do away with them but to complete them. He said, “I tell you, as long as heaven and earth last, not one small mark or part of a word will pass away of the Law of Moses until it has all been done.”^[1] That’s why Paul was able to tell the Roman believers that the Anointed One came to help the Jews. This proved that God told the truth to their early fathers. This showed that God would do what He promised.^[2] And he told the Colossians that the Anointed One wiped away the list of charges brought against all of us. Because of the Law, they stood as a warning of condemnation; but He removed them by paying the price for redemption when He Himself was nailed to the execution-stake on our behalf.^[3]

It’s clear that the Jews themselves were aware that the time of the Messiah’s coming was fixed, and that at that time He would come, as planned, whether they deserved it or not it was possible for them to read this in their own Talmud what the Rabbis said about the coming of the Son of David and the conditions that will exist to herald His coming.^[4] There are many times in Jewish writings that the state of the Jewish world is described that will exist when the Messiah comes. Unfortunately, they are not the times that come from Scripture but from people’s imaginations. But Christians need not smirk or shake their heads because they’ve done the same with the second coming of the Messiah.

The first time He came to redeem the unbelievers, the next time will be to resurrect the believers. As Paul told the Ephesians, because of the blood of the Anointed One, we are bought and made free from the punishment of sin. And because of His blood, our sins are forgiven. His loving-favor to us is so rich.^[5] And it’s all because He gave Himself on our behalf, a gift on the altar to God, which was a sweet aroma to God.^[6] And because of the Anointed One’s willingness to be sacrificed as payment for our sins, Paul tells the Colossians that God took us out of living in sin’s darkness. He put us in the holy nation of His much-loved Son. We were bought by His blood and made free. Our sins are forgiven through Him.^[7]

But the Anointed One did not pay for our ransom to free us from sin’s slave camp so that we might roam freely without any responsibilities, we must never forget that in the past, the way we were living was useless. It was a way of life we learned from those who lived before us. But we were able to escape from that way of living. We were bought, but not with things that decay or corrode. We were bought with the precious blood of the Anointed One in His death. He was a pure and perfect sacrificial Lamb. Long before the world was made, God chose the Anointed One to be sent to save us.^[8]

Paul’s important message for the Roman was that everything God created awaits with great excitement for the time when He will show the world who His children are. The whole creation wants very much for that to happen. Everything God made was allowed to become like something that cannot fulfill its purpose. That was not its choice, but God made it happen with this hope in view: That creation will be made free from ruin – that everything God made will have the same freedom and glory that belong to God’s children.^[9] And this was not just for the moment or our short stay here on earth, even as the Jewish Book of Enlightenment states clearly: “The enlightened will shine like sunshine in the sky, and those who make many right with God will shine like the stars forever and ever.”^{[10] [11]}

When we look back over human history, some may ask why He didn’t come sooner; why not right after Adam’s fall in order to save mankind all the pain and suffering they went through including Noah’s flood and the tower of Babel that tore the human race apart with different languages? Did God need four thousand years to get His plan figured out? The only way to come up with an answer to these questions is to have the mind of God; to see what He saw; know what He knew; understand what He understood. After all, how long did it take mankind to invent printing, to discover vaccines, and to come up with the radio and television? God is never behind time or ahead of time; He’s always right on time. If Paul were writing today, he might use the phrase, “just at the right moment.”

But He didn’t come as an angel, exempt from the laws that govern mankind, nor immune from the requirements of the religious rituals and regulations practiced by the Jews. He did not tread the earth as a celestial being unaffected by human needs or tendencies. Rather, He was born subject to Mosaic Law as a Jew and made subject to Mosaic rites and rituals by His Father’s appointment. He was to keep all the ceremonial and moral requirements perfectly for us as our Representative and to suffer and absorb the full penalty of our violation of it as the human race. This constitutes the significance of His circumcision, His being presented in the Temple for dedication, and His baptism by John, after which Jesus said, “It’s the right thing to do so that all the requirements of righteousness are fulfilled.”^[12] And He did it all so that He, the only Son of God, might make it possible for the Father to adopt all of us as His full-fledged children.

Whenever we read the genealogy of Jesus in the scripture, especially the King James Version, it always follows the method using the word “begat,” such as in Matthew, Chapter One. But here, it does not say, “and Joseph begat Jesus.”  If by the time Paul wrote this letter any doubts arose or any evidence uncovered by the followers of Jesus that His birth occurred some other way than by virgin birth through Mary, Paul would have been forced to admit so. But the Apostle is quite clear and convinced that Jesus was conceived by Mary through the Holy Spirit. As such, He was already God/man at birth; He did not need to work His way into that status through His prayer and fasting, those were meant for other purposes. Prayer and fasting were not fashioned to impress or flatter God, they were designed to enhance our ability at increasing self-discipline. Jesus did not need to obey the Law for His own salvation, He did so to qualify as our Savior.

Interestingly, Paul uses the concept of adoption when discussing the new relationship between the Galatian believers and God. Adoption was already a well-known practice even in Paul’s day. If one brother died, it was common for another brother to adopt his brother’s children. Even estate owners were known to adopt the children of beloved slaves to give them a better chance of becoming free and successful. Paul spent quite a bit of time telling the Galatians about how they grew up as children under the tutelage and custody of Mosaic Law; but through Jesus, the Anointed One God adopted those who believed in Him as true sons and daughters, fully invested in the promise He made to Abraham.  This was not acquired through any other way or by any other means; it was all because of the Anointed One.

Tertullian (155-225 AD) makes reference to what Paul says here in verse four how, when the right time arrived, God sent His Son to be born of a woman through natural childbirth. He wants to know whether the Apostle understood the standard of the term “woman” in accordance with Genesis attributing this to her gender. By calling the virgin Mary a woman, he follows Scripture that calls Eve, as a virgin upon her creation, a woman.^[13] It is also important to note that the Archangel Gabriel was sent to the virgin Mary, blessed her as a woman among women.^[14] Gabriel understood that even a virgin is called a woman. This also has a double meaning. When does a girl become a woman? In the culture of that day, it is said to be at the age of twelve or upon her first menstrual period. So, we see that the phrase “woman” here to mean a “female human being,” capable of bearing a child. But the real argument here is to counter the growing idea that Jesus was some celestial being who appeared on earth as a human being. No! He was born of a woman like any other human being.

Tertullian goes on to point out that Mary was also referred to as being “betrothed” (meaning engaged to be married – KJV “espoused”),^[15] therefore, it is that both by angel and Apostle she is pronounced a woman becoming a bride. However, says Tertullian, it is not to be understood that being betrothed meant they were already married. Even though engaged to Joseph, she still qualified being called a “woman.” Yes, said Tertullian, this does not depend on simply being a female but on the grounds that she was promised to a man as his bride. Some apparently claimed that because she was engaged, she was no longer a virgin; therefore, Jesus was not born of a virgin. But that is ridiculous, she is still a virgin until the marriage is consummated by intimacy. The fact that Joseph was never intimate with Mary means that she remained a virgin woman even after being married. ^[16]

I’ve added what Tertullian says, not because it makes what Paul said any clearer, but to show how that early in Christian history such subjects were being debated. Are these types of disagreements now in the past? The obvious answer is, “No!” During my lifetime, I’ve heard about debates among Christians if women qualify to be ordained as ministers and bishops. Today we have discussions on whether or not homosexuals and lesbians should be ordained as ministers and bishops. Who knows what the next dispute will be related to women’s roles in the Church?

Bishop Cyril of Jerusalem (313-396 AD) addresses the concept of adoption as sons and daughters in the spiritual family of God that Paul speaks of in verse five. Paul clearly distinguishes two things, “the adoption” itself, and the witness of it by “the Spirit of adoption.” For Cyril, the adoption itself belongs to Baptism in which we are made children of God and joint-heirs with the Anointed One: the witness of the indwelling Spirit of adoption is the special grace ascribed to the Sacrament of Chrismation in the Eastern Church,^[17] and to Confirmation in the Western. There are many other passages in which Cyril ascribes it to Baptism itself, as distinct from Chrismation – a gift of the Spirit. As Bishop Cyril sees it, men may baptize you with water to make you a member of the church, but the Spirit will not baptize you to make you a child of God. First, you must be born again.^[18]

[1] Matthew 5:17-18

[2] Romans 15:8

[3] Colossians 2:14 – Complete Jewish Bible

[4] Babylonian Talmud: Seder Nezikin, Masekhet Sanhedrin, folio 98a

[5] Ephesians 1:7

[6] Ibid. 5:2b

[7] Colossians 1:13-14; Cf. Titus 2:14

[8] See 1 Peter 1:18-20

[9] Romans 8:19-23; See Ephesians 1:5

[10] See Daniel 12:3

[11] Zohar on Genesis: The Creation of Elohim

[12] Matthew 4:15

[13] Genesis 2:22

[14] Luke 1:42

[15] Matthew 1:18

[16] The Ante-Nicene Fathers, op. cit., loc. cit. Vol. 4, Tertullian: On the Unveiling of Virgins, Ch. 6, pp. 61-62

[17] The Sacrament of Chrismation, also called Confirmation, is always done in the Orthodox Church together with baptism.

[18] The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: op cit., Second Series, Vol. 7, Eucharistic Rites, Ch. 6, p.60

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson VII)

Andrew G. Roth translates verse three from the Aramaic text as follows: “Even so with us, when we were young, we acted as if subject to the elements of this world.”^[1] In the footnotes, we find comments from Professor Denis Baly (1913-1987) on what Paul was saying here about when the Israelites were “young” and under bondage to the “elements” of the world. As Baly sees it, the phrase “when we were young” is an apparent reference to Israel as a “child” in bondage to Egypt (out of Egypt have I called my son)^[2] as well as the Ten “Lost” Tribes of Israel in bondage to the nations by whom they were carried away into captivity.^[3] The Apostle Paul, in his own case, reminds the Galatians that he was once subject to the “elements of the world,” namely, the misinterpretation of the Torah by the School of Shammai.^[4] Then, the children of Israel being under the yoke of slavery in Egypt and later by other Nations (Assyria, Babylon, etc.) were brought under bondage to the “elements of this world,” that is, were forced to obey the Laws, regulations and false religions of their host Nations.

Paul uses an interesting term to describe how minor children are treated differently than adults, which he says is based on the values of the cosmos. This word “principle” refers to the building blocks which make up a composite form. So, says Paul, just like we know that rules and cultural norms are principles that form societies’ expectations of rights and behavior for minors, so God’s spiritual rules and laws that classify us as under-aged children applies to God’s spiritual society. The Jews enjoyed no personal relationship with the Father or His thoughts, it all came through servants who received them, interpreted them, and propagated them. They lived according to God’s system but went beyond it. They were dependent on a system involving rudimentary religious teaching by rabbis.

I cannot imagine how the Apostle Paul might act if he saw the bondage to religious rituals and regulations the church developed within a few hundred years after his letter to the Galatians.  Even in our lifetime, we’ve witnessed how believers were put under bondage to church rules and teachings that require their obedience in order to accept them as being saved and children of God.  Even though I stand and put my hand over my heart when saying the Pledge of Allegiance, and take off my hat when singing the National Anthem, and have the greatest respect for the Flag of my country, I’d be very upset if our federal government passed a law saying we MUST do all of these things in order to remain a citizen. We do them because we are proud patriots, not to keep or justify our citizenship, to show our thankfulness for our great country.

Church laws and practical teachings may assist in controlling our carnal nature, but they do not deliver us from sin. These laws and restrictions do not justify, nor do they guarantee a person going to heaven. We do not obtain eternal life by refraining from murder, adultery, stealing, lying, etc. Such outward decency does not constitute real Christianity. The heathen may observe the same disciplines to avoid punishment or to secure the advantages of a good reputation. In the last analysis: using such constraints to assure salvation serve only to promote hypocrisy. Just being morally good is not a substitute for being born again. The writer of Hebrews said that the Old Way of worship was made up of Laws about what to eat and drink. These Laws told how to purify and other ceremonial cleansing things of the body. These things must be done until the Anointed One comes to bring a better way of worship.^[5]

Perhaps we can now look back on all that Paul said about Israel being a minor child in the household of the Lord who were treated much like a servant. God was waiting for them to grow up so He could give them the Promised Land. So, He sent Moses the Law as a guide toward that goal. But at the same time said, when the Law finished its task, a new Savior would come replacing Moses as their Deliverer and Teacher, who would then lead them as adults into His kingdom. Unfortunately, when the Messiah arrived, they rejected His leadership and remained with Moses. That’s when the call went out to all the world to come into God’s kingdom. We might say that the Gospel served the same purpose. When the disciples became Apostles, they were given the revelation on how to grow up in the Anointed One in preparation for the time when He would return to take them into the heavenly promised land forever.

4:4-5 Likewise, when the time appointed by God arrived, He sent His Son. He was born of a woman through natural childbirth, and He became subject to all the Jewish religious and cultural laws in effect at the time in order for Him to qualify as our redeemer, and to set us free from the legal guardianship of Mosaic Law in becoming His rightful heirs as grown-up sons and daughters.

 Now Paul brings out the motivating factor behind his wanting the Galatian believers to know why God kept mankind in such an elementary state of faith. It all pointed toward a day of deliverance, a day of regeneration, a day of spiritual freedom from the slavery of Mosaic Law. Paul states explicitly that it didn’t happen until God’s appointed time. It couldn’t be brought on early by the Jew’s pious dedication of keeping every religious ritual and regulation. Furthermore, it couldn’t be prevented by the Gentiles turning further and further away from the One True God into heathenism and idolatry. It was God’s plan and God’s promise, and He intended to keep it on His schedule.

The coming of the Messiah was no accident, no happenstance, and no coincidence. This suggests something being filled like a glass of water. It also carries with it the concept of completeness. Medieval commentator Robert of Melun reminds us that the time of the Lord’s return is called “the fullness of time” since we are waiting for nothing else to secure our salvation. In fact, the Anointed One is all-sufficient to offer salvation. That means, the passing of time will not be altered prior to the Day of judgment, so it is called the fullness of time and the end of the age. By “fullness,” the Apostle does not mean that time itself ceases to exist, for the state of time ought to remain unchangeable because God is unchangeable.^[6] Robert then asks: What does it mean to say that God the Father, sent forth His Son? It is because this is the very Son whose existence is from the Father and appeared to us in the form of human flesh.^[7]

So, what was completed that needed to be filled? What appointed time is Paul talking about? It concerned that point in time that all the prophets pointed to, a time when the Law accomplished all it was able to do in bringing people close to God. But it needed a personal touch. It was time for the son of David to be revealed, from the tribe of Judah; born in the city of Bethlehem; before the destruction of the second Temple, and the completion of the seventy weeks spoken of by Daniel. Again, Paul wants the Galatian believers to know this is God’s design, a plan made in advance. Furthermore, since God made such arrangements for the coming of the Messiah long before it occurred, then how much more should we believe that He included, in those plans, what happens after the Messiah’s time came and then returned to His Father’s side in eternity?

Paul certainly was aware of what Jacob told his sons down in Egypt just before his death about how neither the king’s ornamental wand nor royal staff would be removed from the family of Judah until the One to whom the people’s obedience belongs arrives.^[8] That, One, was Yeshua of Nazareth, the Messiah. This is the same One that the prophet Malachi spoke about whom everyone expected God to send with good news. He will show up in God’s House, bearing a new covenant. He is coming, says the LORD of Hosts.^[9]

This was one of our Lord’s answers when His disciples asked Him about the date of His return that such a time is known only by the Father in Heaven.^[10] So while even today there may be questions about the time, there should be no question about His return. That was also the Apostle Paul’s answer to the Ephesians about Jesus’ first coming and his second coming that it will occur at the right time. That means, God’s time.^[11]

And the idea of the Messiah being born naturally like other babies was no secret. Isaiah made it very plain when he prophesied that He will arrive as a newborn child, born of a virgin. He will be the Son of God. And the rule of the nations will be on His shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Powerful God, Father of Eternity, and Prince of Peace. There will be no end to His rule and His peace, upon the throne of David and over His nation. He will build it to last and keep it strong with what is right and fair and good from that time and forever. All this will be the work of the Lord of All.^[12]

Not only that, but the Prophet Micah revealed where this Messiah would be born, in Bethlehem, and that it was planned long, long ago.^[13] And the Prophet Zechariah speaks of Him as being the One they called “the Branch.”^{[14] [15]} Paul reiterated all this to the Romans as well,^[16] letting them know that this was no last-minute decision, that the early prophets came from the family of Judah. The Anointed One Himself was born of flesh from this family, and He is over all things. May God be honored and thanked forever. Let it be so.^[17]

But when writing to the Philippians, Paul added another dimension to this story of the coming of the Messiah. He told them that Jesus existed as God is. But did not hold to His rights as God. He put aside everything that belonged to Him and made Himself the same as a servant who is owned by someone. He became human by being born as a human. After He became a human, He gave up His important place and obeyed by dying on a cross.^[18] And Paul reassured young Timothy that this was not a myth, that it is important to know the secret of God-like living, which is: The Anointed One came to earth as a human. He was pure in His Spirit. He was seen by angels. The nations heard about Him. Men everywhere put their trust in Him while He was here, and then He was taken up into heaven.^[19]

[1] Andrew G. Roth: Aramaic Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

[2] Hosea 11:1

[3] See 2 Kings, Chapter 17

[4] Rabbi Hillel the Elder’s friendly adversary was Rabbi Shammai, a native of the Land of Israel about whom little is known except that he was a builder, known for the strictness of his views. He was reputed to be stern, quick-tempered, and impatient. Both lived during the reign of King Herod (BC 37-4), an oppressive period in Jewish history because of the Roman occupation of the Land of Israel. Shammai was concerned that if Jews made too much contact with the Romans, the Jewish community would be weakened, and this attitude reflected in his strict interpretation of Jewish law. Hillel did not share Shammai’s fear and, therefore, was more liberal in his view of the Law.

[5] Hebrews 9:10

[6] Robert of Melun: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[7] Ibid., verse 4

[8] Genesis 49:10

[9] Malachi 3:1

[10] Acts of the Apostles 1:7

[11] Ephesians 1:10

[12] Isaiah 9:6-7

[13] Micah 5:2

[14] See Isaiah 11:1-3

[15] Zechariah 6:12

[16] Romans 1:3

[17] Ibid. 9:5

[18] Philippians 2:5-6

[19] 1 Timothy 3:10; See Hebrews 2:14; 10:5-7; 1 John 4:2

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson VI)

Methodist pastor, professor, and writer Daniel D. Whedon (1808-1885) was a strong advocate of the doctrines of Arminianism and freewill versus Calvinism and predestination. In his commentary on what Paul says here, in verse three, Whedon focuses on what is called the “elements of nature,” and how it influenced the development of both the Heathen and Hebrew religions. He points out that as nature is viewed in rows and orders,^[1], so it came to signify the elements of nature, which were then accepted as earth, wind, fire, and water.

So it is, says Whedon, from the visible order of these elements, or from their orderly measurement of time, the term was applied to the heavenly bodies, the sun, the moon, the planets, and the stars. By the phrase “elements of the world,” as used here, most of the ancient interpreters understood the heavenly bodies, as visible objects of worship to the invisible God. But for Whedon, that does not fit the parallelism between the minor child being in bondage to a servant, or tutor, or governor, in verse one, as pertaining to those ancient heathens.

Whedon contends that the parallelism of these elements to the minor child and its tutors simply means that they adjusted to and learned from their tutors all the elements required in order to grow up educated to receive their inheritance. These elements are said to be “of the world,” meaning the world’s philosophy for living. This then puts them in opposition to the doctrines of the Christian Church. The same goes for Judaism’s Law of Moses in contrast to Gentilism’s Laws of Nature. Since Paul is using a figure of speech, we must understand that he is accusing the Galatians of going back to understanding God and His plan of Salvation through the Law instead of going forward through Jesus the Messiah. The Law, as a tutor, was getting them ready for the Messiah, but they chose to regress back to the old way instead of to the new way.^[2]

August H. Strong notes that from eternity God determined to redeem humankind; the history of the human race from the time of Adam’s fall to the coming of the Messiah was wisely arranged to prepare the way for their redemption. The preparation was twofold: Initially, it shows the commonplace nature of sin and the depth of spiritual ignorance and of moral depravity to which the race, left to itself, has fallen. It also shows the powerlessness of human nature to preserve or regain an adequate knowledge of God, or to deliver itself from sin by philosophy or art.

So that raises the question, says Strong, why did Eve not become the mother of the Chosen Seed, as no doubt she probably thought she was? Did she not say, “With the help of the Lord, I have given birth to a man”?^[3] Why was not the cross set up at the gates of Eden? Paul plainly tells us here in verse four that such preparation was necessary, – “For when the fullness of the time came, God sent down His Son.” But this was only one part of the preparation for the ultimate redemption. Of the two agencies God made use of, we leave behind what is called heathenism, the negative preparation. But it was not wholly negative; it was partly positive also.

Strong then points out that the Bible recognizes Job, Balaam, Melchizedek, as instances of the priesthood, or divine communication, outside the bounds of the chosen people. Heathen religions either were not religions, or God was not part of them. Confucius, Buddha, Zoroaster were at least reformers raised up in God’s providence. That seems to be the crux of what Paul says here in verse three in which Judaism might be included as one of the “rudiments of the world,” and, as Paul told the Romans, “The law was brought in so that more people would sin the way Adam did.”^[4] So the Law came in along with other forces cooperating with human factors resulting in primitive religion based on naïve revelation.^[5] All of this as preparatory for the next phase of redemption through Jesus the Messiah.

Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) spoke of spermatikos Logos (“seeds of truth” or “seeds of reasoning”), as part of his view of the natural man and natural morality, among the heathen. He mentions that Moses is a more ancient source than all the Greek philosophers. So whatever both philosophers and poets said concerning the immortality of the soul, or punishments after death, or contemplation of things to come, or similar doctrines, they received such suggestions from their prophets, which enabled them to understand and interpret these things. Therefore, there seem to be seeds of truth among all humankind; but they are not accurately charged with understanding the real truth when they assert contradictory theories.

So, says Justin, what Christian apostles say about future events being foretold does not present it as if their revelations came about by some urgent necessity. Instead, we believe that God’s foreknowledge of all that will be done by all humankind and seeing that it is His decree, then the future actions of humanity, will be repaid according to what they deserve. Through the inspiration of His Holy Spirit, He foretells that He will award the proper gift according to the merit of the actions done. By doing so, He urges the human race to be productive and responsible, thereby showing that He cares and provides for His creation.

Justin points out that while they lacked in truth and revelation, they searched for nothing more except among themselves. But some did search and turned to well-known ancient writings such as the Oracles of Sybil in which we read: “But the dread serpent drew them off by guile to go away unto the fate of death and to gain knowledge of both good and evil. But the wife then the first traitress proved to God; She gave and urged the unknowing man to sin.”^[6] He says that anyone among the heathens who read such things as this joined the devil in death. For not only did they fearlessly read them, but we bring them for your examination, knowing that their contents will be pleasing to all. And if we persuade even a few, our gain will be very great; for, as good husbandmen, we shall receive the reward from the Master.^[7]

Bible scholar William Kelly, a northern Irish member of the Plymouth Brethren movement, asks why some think that anyone should desire to put the Gentiles under the Law when they were brought out from it themselves by the will of God, the work of the Anointed One, and the witness of the Holy Spirit? What a gross inconsistency! What a subversion, not only of the truth of God revealed in the Gospel, but also of redemption, which is its basis! For the Anointed One removed those Jews who remained under the Law, that Gentiles might receive the adoption of sons, bringing them by grace into a place of real salvation and intelligent joy in relationship with their God and Father, out of that bondage as underaged heirs which the Law reckoned them to be.^[8] As Paul says here in verse five, God did this so that He could buy the freedom of those who were under the Law. God’s purpose was to make them His children.

William Ramsay (1851-1939) paints a stark picture of this young heir by saying that according to Paul’s explanation, here in verse three, this child was treated in practice the same way a slave would be treated. They were to take orders and ask no questions, even though, in theory, because of their status as an heir, they are the de-facto owner and master of the slaves with whom they live. But there is hope, the father declared in his will and testament that once they reached the age of eligibility to receive their inheritance, they would immediately be treated as the Master by everyone.^[9]

Modern commentator Robert Gundry gives us some added thoughts to consider. He tells us that ancient civilizations spoke of the world as being made up of four elements – earth, wind, fire, and water – and idolized these elements. Furthermore, since such sacred elements were thought to govern the world, the elements were also identified with the rules and regulations under which human beings are ordered to live. For Jews, the Law consists of those rules and regulations. But Paul wants to compare Jewish believers’ having been held in custody under the Law prior to their conversion with Gentile believers subjected to the rules and regulations in pagan religion prior to their acceptance of the Messiah as their Savior.

So, he uses “the elements of the world” to include both the Law and pagan rules and regulations. That’s why when he says “we” in this verse, he’s referring to himself among the Jewish believers. And when it comes to the idea of enslavement, the shocking comparison of the Law with pagan rules and regulations should keep the Galatians from subjecting themselves to such enslavement – this time to the Law rather than to pagan rules and regulations. In any case, they are the elements of the material world, not the Spirit world.^[10]

Current British theologian Nicholas T. Wright points out that although Paul is talking about Jews in verse three by saying “we,” what he says about these Jews who became Christians is designed to make their story as similar as possible to that of the Gentile Christians. His aim throughout this narrative is to make the Galatians – Gentile Christians themselves, realize that their pilgrimage from paganism to Christianity is matched, stride for stride by the Jewish pilgrimage from the “minor child” status under the Law, into the adulthood of the Christian faith. Of course, there are differences. The Jews already followed the same God who revealed Himself in Jesus and by the Holy Spirit, whereas the pagans followed idols. But the routes are parallel, and the destination is identical.^[11]

[1] “Rows and Orders” refer to the Table of Elements and their volume and value to the whole of nature’s ecosystem.

[2] Daniel D. Whedon: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 230-231, op. cit., loc. cit.

[3] Genesis 4:1

[4] Romans 5:20

[5] August H. Strong: Systematic Theology, op. cit., Vol. 2, Part 6, Ch. 1, Section 1, pp. 521-522

[6] The Sibylline Oracles translated from the Greek into English blank verse by Milton S. Terry, Eaton & Mains, New York, 1899, Bk. 1:50; These oracles are a collection of prophecies in which Jewish or Christian doctrines were allegedly confirmed by Sibyl, a legendary Greek prophetess. The prophecies were actually the work of certain Jewish and Christian writers from about BC 150 to 180 AD and are not to be confused with the Greek Sibylline Books of prophecy.

[7] The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, The First Apology of Justin Martyr, Ch. 44, pp. 322-323

[8] William Kelly: Lectures Introductory to the Study of the Epistles of Paul the Apostle, W. H. Broom, Paternoster Row, London, 1869, p. 173

[9] William H. Ramsay: On Galatians, op. cit., p. 391

[10] Robert Gundry: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[11] Wright, Nicholas T., op. cit.

WHAT’S IN A NAME – In 1852 an English Confectioner named Sam German was working for the Baker Chocolate Company, located in Lower Mills Village on the Neponset River between Dorchester and Milton, Massachusetts. He was experimenting with various blends of chocolate and came up with an interesting mix. The Baker Company execs were so impressed that they begin to produce and sell this chocolate bar and in honor of the inventor who named it “German’s Sweet Chocolate Bar.” It took over one hundred years before the first published recipe for what we now know as German’s Chocolate Cake recipe showed up in a Dallas newspaper in 1957 and came from a Texas homemaker named Mrs. Marie Baca.

It became so popular, that soon a cake mix was being produced and sold as German’s Chocolate Cake Mix. It wasn’t long before in recipes and packaging the apostrophe was dropped from German’s, and it simply became “German Chocolate Cake Mix.” Ask anyone today and they will tell you that German Chocolate Cake had its origin in Germany. But that could not be further from the truth.

The same seems to be what has happened to the original spiritual formula once called the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It was developed by none other than a Jewish prophet known as Yeshua of Nazareth who ministered in the country of Israel over 2000 years ago. But over time the name Jesus Christ was dropped from the title and it simply became known as “The Gospel.” Even today there are certain ingredients missing in the recipe such as virgin birth, His being the Son of God, the Way, Truth and Life, the sacrifice for sins, His blood that cleanses from sin, and His resurrection from death.

As a matter of fact, many people sitting in pews think the recipe for the Gospel was invented in Rome or Jerusalem, in England or the United States. In his letter to the Thessalonians, the Apostle Paul left no doubt as to where the Gospel he preached came from, “He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus.”[1] So it is important that we know the true identity of the Gospel because much of what is preached today is not “Gospel.”  Once you become intimately acquainted with the “Gospel,” you can join the Apostle Paul in declaring: I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of God in bringing salvation.[2] – Dr. Robert R Seyda

[1] 2 Thessalonians 1:8

[2] Romans 1:16

FIVE MYTHS ABOUT WOMEN IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Many readers of the New Testament often imagine that women’s lives in the first and second centuries were highly restricted. While women were definitely not considered the equals of men in wealth and politics, a number of legal and social norms contradict modern expectations. That’s why certain myths about women in the Bible need to be laid to rest. Here are some that Susan E. Hylen offers us.[1]

First, women were totally controlled by their fathers and husbands. But according to Roman law, women were under the legal authority of their father until he died. But the same was true for men. When a father died, his firstborn son was at the top of the list as the heir apparent. However, if he had no sons, then his daughter was authorized to become the legal heir. This was mostly controlled by custom than law.

Second, it is thought that women were not allowed to own property. It is estimated that women during the beginning of the Christian era owned almost one-third of the property in any estate. It was considered a normal part of everyday life. It was also considered useful as a dowry when considering marriage. Although she shared that with her husband. If she divorced him or he divorced her, she continued to own the property.

Thirdly, it is often assumed that women did not exercise leadership during this time. In the Apostle Paul’s salutations at the end of his letter to the Romans, he lists ten influential women who were part of the work there in Rome. It is also documented that many great building projects were undertaken, not by the state, but by individual wealthy women. They offered these gifts to promote the beauty and stature of their city. That is why many of the statues of that day were dedicated to women.

Fourthly, one gets the impression that most women were always subordinate to the men in their lives. History tells us that many women advocated for their political position with people who had access to power. Letters from that period show women sending instructions regarding agricultural work, the purchase or sale of goods, and the care of children. Personal details show that no matter how powerful a man might be or become, behind him was the constant influence of a wise and perceptive woman.

Fifthly, women’s leadership was accepted in private but not in public. While it was well-known that the woman of the house ran the household affairs without objection from their husbands. When going to the market, a person found that many women were owners and were in charge of bringing and selling goods in the market. They also gained a great reputation as astute businesswomen. In many cases, men sought the opinion of women before making a decision that was crucial to their status, business, or estate.

All we have to do is observe that in the Bible, Eve, Sarah, Rebekah, Rachael, Esther, Ruth, Delilah, Rahab, Mary, Phoebe, and many others down history through have influenced significant changes in the world. In our own culture, Mother’s Day was instituted by President Woodrow Wilson in 1914 before Father’s Day was urged by President Calvin Coolidge in 1924. And how many times have you heard athletes refer to the mother as the guiding light in their life? So, let’s put these myths to rest and accept reality. Even in the word’s woman and women, the woman comes first.  – Dr. Robert R Seyda

[1] Biblical Archeology Review, pp. 55-56

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson V)

A contemporary of Augustine’s, Marius Victorinus, offers his insight on the matter. It is understood that every minor heir is under a guardian. The Law of Moses serves to guard these future heirs like a guardian or steward. They were already designated to be heirs, but on account of their spiritual age are not considered adults unable to act on their own authority and accept the responsibility as full heirs to the promises God made to Abraham. Yet they are not at that time treated like slaves engaged in service, but because they are living under guardianship, they are like slaves for a time appointed by the father. This is how a steward, guardian, or custodian exercises power at the bidding of a father: to ensure that when an heir reaches maturity, they will act on their own accord, of their own free will, and become responsible for the inheritance they received. This simile relates to those to whom the Law was given.^[1]  So even though Paul declares the Law no longer valid, he does not dismiss its use in keeping the Jews in line for their eventual inheritance through the Anointed One.

A later scholar, Haimo of Auxerre (820-885 AD), points to how the elements of the Law worked in providing service to the Jews: They became the guiding principles that helped raise abstract and concrete things to a spiritual level. The Apostle Paul points out that we are all subject to the dynamics of this world. This should help us comprehend these guiding principles as pertaining to the Jews in two ways: By first understanding: the principles are called the Law and the Prophets because just as the elements are the beginning and foundation of all earthly things, so the Law and the Prophets are the beginning and foundation of all divine instruction. That’s why in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the writer also calls them elements of the Law because Jews were servants under the Law and the Prophets.^[2]

In other words, they were serving under the elements because their lives were affected by their observances of the sun and the moon, and celebrated new moons and other festivals. Bear in mind that Paul did not say, “we were serving the elements,” but rather that we were under the influence of the elements. Consequently, we live by observing what the Law and the Prophets said. Perhaps he means that we were tied to observing the seasons and paid attention to the course and stages of the moon. Since the sun and moon are elements, however, the Gentiles were, in fact, servants of the elements.^[3] While the Jews easily saw how this applied to many of their festivals, the non-Jews also saw how it related to their pagan practices. However, these were never seen as guardians of the Promise.

Somewhat later, another medieval scholar, Bruno the Carthusian, points out that the Apostle Paul certainly stated that there is no longer any task for the custodian to perform, but he didn’t explain why there was a tutor or guardian needed in the first place. He addresses this here by saying that even if you are now in union with the Anointed One and no longer need the tutor, there was a time when you really needed such a tutor.^[4] Bruno goes on to say that the Law, as a custodian, also served to make sure that the inheritance was properly managed.  No wonder the Jewish people continue to be a recognized group and culture in the world. And just as a child grows in learning and knowledge, so the Law served to provide prophets and teachers who helped in making God’s plan clearer and more relevant. Then, when everything was in place, God sent His Son, making sure that the lineage of Jesus identified Him as a descendant of Abraham and of David.

Toward the later stages of the medieval period (also known as the Middle Ages: 500–1500 AD), Nicholas of Lyra sees verse three as a reference to the Jews’ life under the laws of the First Covenant when they functioned according to the legal observances referred to here as the elements, meaning the letters. When small children are learning, they begin with these basic elements so that they might eventually be able to name and define things. The children proceed along these lines until the time comes to put aside repeating such things, at which point they go on to devote their efforts to advanced academic disciplines. That’s why the legal observances of the Law functioned as symbols that were meant to prepare Jews for the coming of the Messiah. That is why the Law was to be put aside when the Anointed One arrived.^[5]

I like the way Martin Luther phrased it. He believes that Paul tried to say that the Law is something material and mundane. It may warn of evil, but it does not keep us from doing wrong. The Law does not make us right in God’s eyes; it does not ensure that a person will go to heaven. You do not obtain eternal life just because you don’t kill, commit adultery, steal, etc. Forms of outward holiness do not constitute real Christianity. Even the unconverted follow restraints to avoid punishment or to earn a good reputation. To tell the truth, such restraint is simple hypocrisy. When the Law exercises its higher function, it accuses and condemns the conscience. All these effects of the Law cannot be called divine or heavenly. These effects are elements of the world. You need something better than that.^[6]

Puritan preacher Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), in speaking about the Church’s role in God’s plan of salvation said, that from the time of Adam’s fall to the incarnation of the Anointed One, there were many changes and revolutions in the world, but they were only turning the wheels to make way for the coming of the Messiah. Although the world was, for the most part, ignorant as to knowing the One True God, there were lights along the way – Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, the Law, Joshua, the prophets, the psalmists, and King David God used to let His light shine into the dark world no matter how small or contained as they were. They marked the path for the Light of the World to come. As Paul puts it here in verses one through three, God’s people were still minors being under tutorship until they were set free to live as adults in God’s Kingdom. Once the Anointed One came, died, buried, and rose again, all those who followed such as the Apostles, Paul, and others down through Church history were no lights within themselves but reflected the Light living in them.^[7]

Adam Clarke (1760-1851) takes note of Paul’s use of the phrase “the elements of the world” in this verse.^[8]  He explains that this is a common Jewish phrase, that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The Apostle insinuates that the Law was not the plan of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it. In the Gospel, this alphabet composes the most glorious hymn of Divine knowledge. However, the alphabet itself is nothing spiritual until it is made into syllables, words, sentences, and instruction. So, the Law, taken by itself, gives no salvation; it’s like an outline of the Gospel, but it is the Gospel alone that fills up the spaces in between.^[9]

Catholic scholar Haydock (1774-1849) goes on to say that Chrysostom understands the elements of the world to be the exterior ceremonies and precepts of the law of Moses, with an insinuation to the first elements or rudiments which children are taught. And British theologian Charles John Elliott, who wrote during this same time in his exposition, says that the word translated elements is peculiar. The root word from which it is derived means “in a row.” Hence the derivative is applied to the letters of the alphabet because they were arranged in rows. That’s why it came to mean the “elements” or “rudiments” of learning, and then “elements” of any kind.

The older commentators on this passage, for the most part, took it in the special sense of “the elements of nature,” “the heavenly bodies,” either as the objects of Gentile worship or as marking the times of the Jewish festivals. There is, however, little doubt that the other sense is best: “the elements or rudiments of religious teaching.” These are called “the elements of the world” because they were mundane and material; they included no clear recognition of spiritual things. The earlier forms of Gentile and even of Jewish religion relied mostly on the senses, that’s why rites, rituals, regulations, and ceremonies became the most important elements. This same phrase, in the same sense, occurs twice in the Epistle to the Colossians.^{[10] [11]} How true this is of many who begin their spiritual lives in the Church. They learn all the required rites and ceremonies before they are introduced to the basic Gospel and Epistles to grow up in God’s Word. Unfortunately, like the Jews, they become stuck in their elementary spiritual education and never move on.

Scottish minister and theological author, James Macknight (1721-1800) give a critical look at whether or not the rites and rituals of Moses excelled in any way over the rites and rituals of heathenism. It begins by looking at their divine origin and the knowledge of a real atonement for sin, exhibited by types and figures of their respective religions. When examined closely, we see that the subjects of God’s moral government, given in its precepts, the law of Moses in the Jewish religion afforded the Jew no better hope of pardon than the idolatry laws of heathen. Like the law of nature, the Law of Moses required perfect obedience to all its precepts, under the penalty of death. Consequently, it subjected every disobedient follower to death without mercy.

Another thing that Macknight points out is that the Jewish religion offered no better sacrifices and more thorough purifications than the heathen religions. The water and blood may claim to cleanse the body, but it did not cleanse the conscience from the guilt of disobedience. While they both required strict obedience to all the rules, they offered no assistance that enabled them to obey its requirements. In other words, neither the Hebrew nor the Heathen religions were able to procure the pardon for disobedience and thereby proved unable to save them from the sentence of death. So, since all the rites, rituals, regulations, and ceremonies of both religions offered no salvation, they also offered no promise of eternal life even to the most obedient adherents. That’s why the Apostle Paul, here in verse three, accuses them of going back to the basic elements of heathenism, which bore a close resemblance to the elements of Hebraism. No wonder the Apostle was confounded that the Galatians, who were given both salvation and eternal life through faith in Jesus Messiah, were trading their freedom through grace for a set of failed rites, rituals, regulations, and ceremonies through the Law.^[12]

[1] Marius Victorinus, Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[2] Hebrews 5:12

[3] Haimo of Auxerre: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[4] Bruno the Carthusian: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[5] Nicholas of Lyra: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[6] Martin Luther: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[7] Edwards, Jonathan. The Complete Works of Jonathan Edwards: op. cit., (Kindle Location 4784-4810)

[8] See King James Version.  The NIV has “the basic principles of the world.”

[9] Adam Clarke: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[10] Colossians 2:8; 2:20

[11] Charles John Ellicott: New Testament Commentary for English Readers, 1878, loc. cit.

[12] James Macknight: Apostolical Epistles, op. cit., pp. 168-169

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson IV)

G. K. Barrett gives us an informative explanation of the Greek noun paidagogos (educator), a word for which there is no single English equivalent. Some English versions use teacher, schoolmaster, instructor, governor, governess, etc. But in everyday Greek, a pedagogue was not a schoolmaster or even a tutor. A pedagogue did no teaching (so that we are not to think of the Law as giving elementary religious instruction and then passing us on to the Anointed One for higher studies). A pedagogue was a top slave, employed by a well-to-do master to accompany his son to school. He might carry the boy’s books for him, but he was there to see that the boy did not run off and play truant. But while the picture changes says Barrett, nevertheless, the thought remains the same. To get into the kingdom of God, there are no by-passes, the only way open is through the Anointed One. This emphatic Christ-centered concept is another way of saying, faith. The Anointed One has no competition, so, as Christians, we have no more to do with the pedagogue.^[1]

As Grant Osborne sees this “tutors” and “governors” subject is that the child in this analogy is likely the oldest child of a wealthy Roman, the one who will inherit both the estate and the exalted place in society the father possesses. In spite of the child’s promising future, as a minor, he is placed under overseers. They have absolute control, and the child must obey their every command. The typical practice, discussed in 3:23–24, entails the appointment of a top servant to function much like a full-time foster-parent, watching over the child and controlling his movements and development to adulthood, the “time set by his father” for him to receive his inheritance.

There, says Osborne, the analogy shifts. The “guardians and trustees” here in verse two are not really the custodians or pedagogues, as Paul mentions in 3:23–24 but probably the “managers of the estate.” It appears that Paul moved beyond the image of the maturation of a child to illustrate his point. The “time set” for the onset of adulthood was not determined by the father but by custom; a fourteen-year-old child officially reached adulthood. Many expositors think that the appointed time to which Paul refers, along with the mention of “guardians and trustees,” points back to the exodus of Israel from Egypt (see verse three) when God’s people awaited their inheritance in the Promised Land.

This fits Paul’s emphasis on redemption and adoption as God’s children. Osborne seems to feel that Paul’s point is that the Galatians experienced an exodus from slavery under the Law and now appear to be ready to throw it all away.^[2] The only problem is there is no second exodus plan, there is no Moses to do it all over again. The goal is the Promised Land. Looks like the Jews, and some Gentiles, in Galatia are repeating the lament of the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai and are trading the Shekinah pillar of fire for the golden calf of idolatry.

Jewish Christian Rabbi Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy gives us his view of this minor child growing up until he reaches the age of maturity and is then given his rightful inheritance left by his father. First of all, he sees Paul’s teaching on sonship from a 1st-century perspective, conveniently written in terminology that the Galatians could easily identify with, that of Roman Law. From ben Layman’s view, the Jew is the child, an heir according to birth, yet a slave to sin and death; an heir of the estate promised by God as explained to the Fathers of the Faith, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore, all Jews are currently under the supervision of guardians and trustees (the Law and the Prophets) until the moment of spiritual salvation set by the Father in Heaven, the moment of personal, trusting faith in the Promised Seed – Yeshua of Nazareth.

Now, once the child (the Jew) matured in their faith (placed trust in Yeshua), they gained a lasting covenant membership and thereby receive the promise of the Father. Just because they came into the world as a Jew, it did not secure the promises offered by the Father. Rather, they, being heirs, lived and labored as a slave, governed by the Torah (schoolmaster) until they meet and believe in the Teacher of Righteousness – Yeshua. In this passage, Paul reveals that the children of Israel do enjoy a covenant status on a limited basis due to being born into Abraham’s family. Yet, they do not fully understand this truth because the Rabbis of the past led the average Jewish person to an illogical conclusion, namely, suggesting their full and lasting covenant membership based on their position at physical birth without having arrived at the “time set by his Father” – the coming of the Messiah to be their Savior.

Ben Lyman then points out that since the Gentiles did not go through this same period as the Jews, they found themselves in the same position as heathens, subject as slaves to sin and death by the laws of their conscience by which they understood right from wrong. Therefore, at the “time set by the Father”, they arrived at the moment of conversion into believing that this same Yeshua also came to be their Lord and Savior. At that moment, they, too, found themselves counted among the heirs of the Father’s promises to Abraham as his spiritual children.^[3] Unfortunately, just as the Jews had been misled by their Rabbis, so the Gentiles have been misled by their Reverends to believe that by simply being born into a Christian family, they can be counted as children of God, and this is sealed by their baptism as infants.

At this point, it is reasonable for any Galatian to ask: What does all this being a minor and having a foster parent – the Law, to take care of me until I grow up and take over my life as an adult? Paul is simply laying the foundation for an even larger structure he will build in the coming verses. Knowing the fundamentals helps a person to better understand the complicated effects when presented to them. But as Christians today, it also is intended to show that when we are born again, we are like a child. We are already made heirs to the promises of God, but we must grow into adulthood to act like adults to our situation in the world. But instead of the Law or Church Rules to guide us, we have the Gospel of our Lord and the Epistles of the Apostles to teach us the truths we need to gain adulthood status.

4:3 The same was true of us Jews before. Under Mosaic Law, we were minors subject to all the rules and basic principles our culture applies to minors. 

Having used an illustration from secular life, Paul now transitions to how it affected the Galatians’ spiritual life. God’s relationship with people throughout the First Covenant period, says Paul, was like a Father to children not yet of age. No wonder He got upset with them so often, especially considering their temper tantrums with Moses. Just as in our own culture, children under a certain age cannot vote, cannot procure a driver’s license, cannot join the military, and cannot buy alcohol or cigarettes – thank God! However, Paul did not apply this to their physical age but their spiritual age. So, the Jewish people lived subject to the restrictions of religious rituals and regulations as underage children. Even though God put certain benefits in His promises to Abraham, He declared that His children must first come of age in order to enjoy them.

Since what Paul says here about those who were confused as physical adults but spiritually childish, laboring under the Law with no hope of relief, then the words of Jesus meant more to them than others when He invited those who were struggling and burdened down because of the many sacrifices, prayers, Temple visits, and laws they must comply with, to come to Him. He’d give them relief from their burdens.^[4] And then the Apostle John points out that while Moses came down from the mountain with the Law to put them in a yoke of obedience, Jesus the Word came down from heaven to liberate them by grace to live in freedom.^[5]

Paul also made reference to this when he met the Council in Jerusalem, who wanted to require the Gentiles to become adherents to the Jews’ ceremonial laws, so he asked them why do you test God by putting too heavy a load on the back of the followers? It was too heavy for our forefathers or for us to carry. We believe it is by the loving-favor of the Lord Jesus that we are saved.^[6] And Paul brought up the same subject when writing to the church in Rome when told them to stop acting like people who were still under a tutor or guardian, they are always afraid. Instead, the Holy Spirit makes us His children, and we can call Him, “Our Father.”^[7]

Marius Victorinus states that from his point of view, the elements of the world were thought to be of vital importance. Some concluded that the elements in themselves were responsible for their own motions and, as it were, inevitable, necessary consequences of those motions on other beings, such as stars, and human life being affected by their positions in the heavens at certain times of the month or year. Such thinking created the idea that humans served such elements as the sun, moon, and stars were ordained as guides to keep the planet on course; thus, they were required. Paul states that the real function of the occupants of the universe in the sky and on earth was explicitly designed by their Creator to testify of His existence.

Victorinus goes on to point out that the Anointed One was born of a woman, so it can be said He was made for this temporary purpose: to be subject to the law. The Galatians were to understand from this that they were now in error, for the Savior Himself, in whom they believed, was made subject to the Law as they were although He remained the Lord of the Law.^[8] To put it another way, just as the letters of the alphabet are put together to make words and words make sentences and sentences make paragraphs, so basic elements of the earth and atmosphere when they are put together, help us understand our environment and what makes it work.^[9]

Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) asks a question to determine a better understanding of what Paul is saying here. He wants to know how, according to this analogy, were the Jews under the physics of this world, since they were under the guardianship of the Law of Moses? Were they not being tutored to worship the one God who made heaven and earth? Earlier, Paul portrayed the Law as a disciplinarian whom the Jewish people were under, now he speaks of the world’s moral principles as guardians and trustees under whom the Gentiles were virtual slaves. That means, during their childhood the children – that is, the believers on account of their one faith belonging to the one Seed of Abraham, gathered from both the Jews and the Gentiles – was in part under the discipline of the Law, and in part under the elements of this world which they served as minors as if under guardians and trustees (namely, the part gathered from the Gentiles).^[10] However, while not all scholars see the Gentiles included here, what Paul is saying became a good lesson for them to apply to their own pagan rules and customs.

[1] C. K. Barrett: On Galatians, op., cit. pp. 35-36

[2] Osborne, G. R. On Galatians: Verse by Verse, op. cit., p. 122

[3] Ibid. p. 138

[4] Matthew 11:28

[5] John 3:31

[6] Acts of the Apostles 15:10-11

[7] Romans 8:15

[8] Edwards, M. J. (Ed.). On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 53, 56

[9] See Joseph Beet: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 103-104

[10] Augustine, Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson III)

English theologian and Bishop of Durham, J. B. Lightfoot (1828-1889), looked at both the Roman and Jewish laws on tutorship related to an underaged heir compared to what Paul describes here and finds that it fits neither one very well. Instead, it involved a procedure based on a special code in force in Galatia. But since there is no evidence to match either one, it appears that Paul simplified the process to make his point about coming-of-age.

Another point that Lightfoot makes is that this tutor assigned to mentor this child could not perform any act except that given to him by the dead father’s will and testament in compliance with the accepted laws of the land. It’s obvious that whoever the tutor might be, they came from the top tier of the servant roster because of the necessity for them to represent the heir to the State and whose sanction they needed to validate any contract given to them on his behalf. So, we are not to take the role of the tutor lightly, nor more than the Apostle Paul wanted to treat the Law, with little regard. We can only imagine where the Israelites might have ended up without the Law given to Moses. If they seemed prone to idolatry even as the chosen nation of God’s children, one can only guess what condition they might end up in.^[1]

In contrast to what Meyer said earlier about not interpreting the Greek noun epitropos to mean “guardian, Presbyterian minister and word study expert Marvin Vincent (1834-1922), disagrees, pointing to Luke’s Gospel where he mentions Joanna, the wife of Chuza – whom he identifies as the epitropos (same Greek noun as used here) of King Herod.^[2] Vincent calls this a general term, covering all to whom supervision of the child is entrusted, and should not be limited to paidagōgos  (as used in chapter three, verse twenty-four here in Galatians), where it is rendered by KJV as “schoolmaster.”^[3] In other words, the tutor that Paul is talking about had no specific authority to do anything but what they were told to do. Such was the Law given to Moses.

G. G. Findlay (1849-1919) imagines one fancy Jew replying to Paul’s previous argument on how the children of Israel missed their opportunity to become part of the kingdom of God because they refused to grow up into spirit adults by accepting the Messiah, and how that left them in bondage under the Law which possesses no power to save or forgive. Here’s the imagined conversation between this egotistical Jew and Paul:

As long as we are imagining, we might imagine this Jew asking: Well, then, how do we grow up? Paul would answer: By growing up in Jesus, the Messiah! And since they refused to do that, even when Yeshua the Messiah came to them in the flesh, they still refused to pay homage to Him and pledge allegiance to their new King. So, God sent out His laborers to cut down these dead branches on the Holy Olive Tree – Israel, and get some branches from the wild olive trees – the Gentiles, and graft them in as adopted children of God. Now they are the ones who flourish, bearing much fruit to the glory and honor of God.

American theologian and professor at Yale University Benjamin W. Bacon (1860-1932) focuses not only on the young heir but on his inheritance that Paul talks about here. He states that according to many contemporary writings, Jewish and Christian alike, they leave no doubt whatsoever as to the assumed content of the “inheritance.” It must be literally understood, as Paul says, “that God made Abraham heir of the world.”^[6] Intended originally for Adam and Eve,^[7] but when Adam proved his unfitness, God chose Abraham and his seed, including all faithful Israelites, to the exclusion of “sinners of the Gentiles” and “disloyal Jews.”

Bacon quotes from Esdras, who complains, “And after these, Adam also, whom You made lord of all your creatures: from whom all of us descended, and the people also whom You chose. All this have I’ve told You, O Lord, because You made the world for our sake. As for the rest of the nations which also came from Adam, You said that they are nothing more than spit and You likened all of them as a drop in the bucket.”^[8] But even the chosen stood in danger of losing everything because of Moses’ disobedience in obeying God’s command that he circumcise his son if it wasn’t for his wife Zipporah who did it for him.^[9] So, if God made the world for our sake, the ones you called to be Your own, why do we still not possess the world as our inheritance?

The Christian’s expectations, says Bacon, are not any less but even greater. Your “Son” must “inherit the earth.^[10] And if we still do not see all the things made subject unto Him, the Messiah’s triumph over the demonic powers which now control the world proves that He still waits for the day when all His enemies, visible and invisible, are made subject to Him.^[11] So we can say that the Gentiles vainly looked for the Creator in the objects which He made, and which Jews understand to be for their benefit, is, therefore, revealed in God’s Church, which takes Israel’s place as His heirs.

So, says Bacon, the Church’s conflict is not, like Israel’s, against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the world-rulers of darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places^[12] who now struggle to keep hold of the dominion they have abused,^[13] supplanting and subjecting the rightful heir. When the sons of God are manifested as God’s adoptive heirs, the creation, delivered from its bondage to “vanity,” will gladly revert to its intended owners, in spite of all that “death or life, angels or principalities, height or depth” can do to prevent it.^[14] When this happens during the Millennial reign of the Messiah on earth, the “adoption of sons” will be made manifest “to every angel and spirit,” revealing the hidden purpose of the Creator.^{[15] [16]}

Archibald Robertson (1863-1934), in his Greek word studies, tells us that under Roman law, the tutor was in charge of the child until he was fourteen when the curator took charge of him until he was twenty-five. Ramsay notes that in Græco-Phrygia cities, the same law existed except that the father in Syria appointed both tutor and curator, whereas the Roman father appointed only the tutor. Burton argues plausibly that no such legal distinction is meant by Paul, but that the terms here designate two functions of one person. The point does not disturb Paul’s illustration at all.^[17] In other words, Paul was more interested in understanding his allegory in the spirit of its use here as an example instead of taking every little part of it as being literal and attempting to match it to each part of the illustration he was using.

Richard Longenecker notes that there is a number of commentators who disagree on whether or not the two Greek nouns: epitropos (“tutors” – KJV) and oikonomos (“governors” – KJV) are separate positions or whether they can be used interchangeably. He notes that Greek statesman and orator Demosthenes (BC 384-322) in one of his speeches used these as a “double title” for one man named Nausicrates. It involves a trial where Aristæchmus, one of the guardians of minor sons Nausimachus and Xenopithes, was sued by them after they attained adulthood, for rendering a false account and breach of their father’s trust. In his opening statement to the jury, he talked about the compromise of the guardians, who, after his death took over the management of their property.^[18] Longenecker does not believe that Paul was all that worried about whether or not the terms were understood as a separate or as a double title.^[19]

Tim Hegg presents a table that may help us understand the role of the Law as the Pedagogue in chapter three and the Guardian and Steward of Grace in chapter four. The Law is for a minor child, Grace is for an adult. Even though the benefactor is dead and the legal minor is the owner of the inheritance, it cannot be given to him until he grows up. But once the minor becomes an adult, then everything is given to him.

[1] J. B. Lightfoot: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 264-264

[2] Cf. Matthew 20:8

[3] Marvin Vincent: On Galatians, Word Studies, op. cit., loc. cit., pp., 132-133

[4] Romans 9:4-5

[5] Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Galatians by G. G. Findlay, op. cit., Ch. 16, p. 244

[6] Romans 4:13

[7] Genesis 1:28; Psalm 8:5–7

[8] 2 Esdras 6:54-56

[9] Exodus 4:24

[10] Matthew 5:5; 1 Corinthians 3:22; Revelation 21:1, 7

[11] 1 Corinthians 15:27; Hebrews 2:8, 9

[12] Ephesians 6:12

[13] 1 Corinthians 2:8

[14] Romans 8:19-22, 38-39

[15] Ephesians 3:9-11

[16] Bacon, B. W: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., pp. 85–86

[17] Archibald Robertson: Word Studies on Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 1460

[18] The Orations of Demosthenes: Against Nausimachus, translated by Charles Rann Kennedy, Published by George Bell & Sons, London, 1892, pp. 245-246

[19] Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians, op. cit., Vol. 41 (Word Biblical Commentary) (Kindle Location 10394-10406)

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

PAUL’S LETTER TO THE GALATIAN CHURCHES

CHAPTER FOUR (Lesson II)

Early church scholar Chrysostom (349-407 AD) sees a spiritual application here. Paul wanted his fellow Jews to understand that the word “child” does not denote age but a level of understanding; meaning that from the beginning God designed these gifts for us, but, because we reasoned as children in our understanding, He taught us through the laws of nature, that is, new moons and Sabbaths, for these days are regulated by the course of sun and moon. If then, we return to become subordinate to the Law again, we go from being grownups to become children again. As a consequence of observing days and months, our Lord and Master, the Sovereign Ruler, our lives are reduced to the rank of being tutored minors.”^[1] Again, we must remind ourselves that Paul’s use of the Law pertained to the Jewish converts in Galatia. However, Chrysostom sees how this can be applied to non-Jews when it comes to the laws of paganism.

One of Chrysostom’s contemporaries, Ambrosiaster, also shares his view on what Paul intends to say here. He notes that many of the laws they enforced in his day appear similar to those Paul speaks of here regarding the age at which a person is still considered a minor and when they reached adulthood.  In fact, we still see those laws on the books in most countries around the world today. As a minor, no child is allowed to exercise their rights and liberties as adults until they come of age, and as such lived under subjection to the authority of their parents. He then tells that by using this example, Paul shows that those who under the law seemed like children and did not enjoy their liberty because they found themselves subject to the law on account of their sin.^[2] In other words, as we say today: they continued to act like children instead of growing up in the Anointed One, where they acted like adults with all the privileges that gave them the ability to walk by faith and not by sight.

Over the years of my pastoral, missionary, and teaching ministry, I found this also to be the case in many churches I pastored or visited, and schools where I taught. I encountered those who, after they became born again, members of God’s family and learned the rules provided by the church for them to live in accordance with church teaching, they never grew past that. They remained children and, from time to time, required correction and discipline as children when they broke the rules. For those of you who’ve raised children, what would you think if after your child became a legal adult, they still lived at home, remained unemployed because they never applied anywhere for employment? You still needed to tell them how to dress, how to act, scolded them when they did wrong, and restricted their movements?

Believe it or not, there are some parents who still want to manage their grown children already out of the house, have a job, are married, and raising their own families. This illustrates the case of the believers in Galatia. Paul is telling them that when he left them, he considered them adults in the Anointed One. Yet, these false teachers came along and convinced them they’re still children and must abide by the rules of the Law they obeyed before they became born again in the Anointed One.

Early church theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 AD) shares his take on the designation of those whom Paul calls servants. He advises us it should be noted that among the Jewish people, some served as servants in the strict sense; those, namely, who observed the Law through fear of punishment and through a desire for the temporal things which the Law promised. But others only conducted themselves like servants but, in reality, stood as sons and heirs. Although outwardly, they lived as law-abiding citizens of Israel, worshiping in the Temple, making offerings and adherents to the Ten Commandments, they did not place their hope in the Law but used these things in a spiritual sense. So, while on the surface, they qualified as Jews inasmuch as they observed the ceremonies and other commandments of the Law, nevertheless, decided to freely live their lives according to the will of God. They saw in these things their spiritual meaning, whereas servants used them chiefly through fear of punishment and with a desire for earthly convenience.^[3]

Reformer John Calvin sees this relationship of a child (denied any inheritance) growing into adulthood (where inheritance is guaranteed upon the death of the giver) in a unique way. Calvin notices that some say that what Paul is saying here applies to a father leaving his estate to his sons who still are minors. They feel that Paul is speaking of two nations: natural Israel and spiritual Israel. What they say is, without a doubt, very true, says Calvin, but does not apply to what Paul writes here in verses one and two. The elect, although they are the children of God from the womb, yet, until by faith, they come into the possession of freedom through the Anointed One remain as slaves under the Law. Consequently, from the time that they came to know the Anointed One as their Lord and Savior, they no longer needed this tutelage of the Law.

Then Calvin says, granting all this that others use to interpret these verses as plausible, he will not accept that Paul sees this as involving individuals, or draws a distinction between the time of unbelief and the calling by faith. The matters in dispute are these: Since God’s congregation is one body, how come then our condition is different from that of the Israelite congregation? Since we are free by faith, how come that they, who shared faith in common with ours, yet are not partakers with us of the same freedom? Since we are all equally the children of God, how come that we are exempt from a yoke which they were forced to carry?

On these points, the controversy turns and not on the manner in which the Law reigns over each of us before we are freed by faith from its slavery. Let this point be first of all settled, that Paul here compares the Israelite congregation, which existed under the First Covenant, with the Christian congregation under the Final Covenant, that we may thereby perceive what points we agree on and where we differ. This comparison furnishes the most abundant and most profitable instruction.^[4] To give some clarity here, in referring to the Israelite congregation he focuses on those who believed and obeyed God before the Law came into existence, such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and after the giving of the Law: Elijah, Elisha, the faithful remnant, Isaiah, Jeremiah, et. al.

For Matthew Poole, the Apostle already determined that the whole body of those who believed in Jesus the Anointed One, where that seed of Abraham to which the promise was made, and so heirs of the promises made to Him; yet so, that, as it is among men, though a child be a great heir and lord of a great estate, yet while they are under age and seen as a servant; so the time of the Law is as it were the time of underaged believers’ lived in that time were used as servants.^[5] In other words, the Jews were still children under the tutelage of the Law when Jesus the Messiah came. But they refused to grow up in Him while the Gentiles, who knew nothing of the Law as their schoolmaster, were accepted into the same fold but as adults, because they now followed the Master Teacher.

Nineteenth-Century Roman Catholic writer George Haydock (1774-1849) gives us his understanding of the church’s interpretation of what Paul is saying here. For him, by using the term “child,” in this instance, the Apostle includes all the Jewish people, who, as long as they stayed children under the Law, remained subject to numerous restrictions, although God chose them as His favorite children. But when the fullness of time came, they received the adoption of children in possession of the liberty of the law of grace.  They no longer felt obliged to observe the legal rites. That’s why the Apostle Paul wishes the conclusion to be drawn that if persons once subject to the Law are now exempt from it, how much more will those excused from its yoke and never under its control be free.^[6] Most reformed scholars do not see the Jews as being part of the adoption process since God already considers them His chosen people. So, it seems that Haydock blurred the line here between the Jews and non-Jews.

German Protestant theologian Heinrich A. W. Meyer (1800-1873), does not believe we should interpret the Greek noun epitropos to mean “guardian” since the father of the child is assumed dead as it says in verse one. A better term would be “overseer” or “governor” without any more specificity. The term, says Meyer, denotes anyone, to whose governorship the child is assigned by the father in the arrangement, which was made as part of the family estate. It relates to the fact that in most households in those days, superior slaves were appointed as managers of the household and property,^[7] on whom the young heirs depended for money and other needs. This lasted until the time appointed by the father to release his heir from this state of dependence.^[8] So it should have been easy for the Galatians to see how this represented the placing of the children of Israel under the management of the Law until the appointed time when they were released to freedom by God through His Son, the Messiah.

Benjamin Jowett (1817-1893) makes a rather informative comment here on verse one that builds on Paul’s example of an heir who must wait until the fullness of time came for their release. He says that when we who once fell under the Law’s authority look back on the period of time when we fell under the tutelage of the legal and ceremonial laws of religion when we labored as servants in our own house when we owned nothing and were yet considered lords of all. Then we compare it with what Jesus said: “A slave does not stay with a family forever. But a son belongs to the family forever.”^[9] In other words, servants are not considered permanent members of the family; they come and go. But Jesus is not finished, He goes on to say: “But if the Son makes you free, you are really free.^{[10] [11]} It’s obvious that Paul is trying to tell these misguided Galatians that it seems senseless than that those chosen as sons and daughters in the family of God, now want to go back to being servants.

To those of us in the Final Covenant era who live in the freedom of God’s grace by faith, taking what Paul is saying here about the Jews being minor children of God under the Law, who can only become heirs when they accept Jesus the Anointed One, it is hard to apply this to our situation today. The one concept that does bear consideration is when a Christian who is still being tutored by the laws of the church they belong to, instead of God’s Word, can be considered as a minor. The Apostle Peter spells this out clearly when he says: but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus the Anointed One.[12] And the Apostle Paul states: For this reason we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; that you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing Him, being fruitful in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God.[13]

[1]Chrysostom, Homilies on Galatians, loc. cit.

[2]Ambrosiaster: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit., p. 21

[3] Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit.

[4] John Calvin: Commentary on Galatians, loc. cit., p. 95

[5] Matthew Poole: On Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit.

[6] George Haydock: Catholic Bible Commentary, loc. cit.

[7] See Luke 16:1

[8] Heinrich A. W. Meyer: Critical and Exegetical Hand-Book, op. cit. loc. cit., p. 166

[9] John 8:35 – Easy-to-Read Version

[10] Ibid. 8:36

[11] Benjamin Jowett: Commentary on Galatians, op. cit., loc. cit., p. 335

[12] 2 Peter 3:18

[13] Colossians 1:9-10