True Heart of Worship
Church of God (Seventh Day) Independent
Church of God (Seventh Day) Independent
It was difficult to come up with a name for this study because Paul talks about so many things in the verses we are about to study. Just from that title, though, you may have figured out we'll be talking about the Galatian Church. They had become confused about the purpose of the Old Testament Law and its relationship with Christianity.
Some of the Galatians had started living under the Old Testament Law. Paul scolds them for being so foolish. In this study, we are more interested in what he says about the relationship of the Old Testament Law to the lives of Christians.
This study will cover Galatians 4 verses 1 through 10, and then we'll skip through the following verses, picking out selected ones.
The book of Galatians, which was a letter written to the Galatian church, was written by a very frustrated Apostle Paul. He had put a lot of effort into building that church, and now a bunch of the people in that church have been tricked into going back into the Old Covenant. The verses in this study are the theological core behind what Paul is saying to the Galatians about their foolish decision.
The Galatian church that Paul is speaking to is primarily made up of Jewish converts to Christianity. This was true of most churches in their early days. The Bible's phrase, "first to the Jews," was true, but not because anyone intended it that way. The easiest converts were Jews who already knew about God, his Law, and a coming Messiah. This also left them susceptible to being drawn back into the Old Covenant.
It appears Paul is addressing these people when he says, "[you] wish again to be subject to [the Old Covenant]". By saying "again," the text implies that they were previously subject to it, … then were not, … then were again.
It appears Paul also addresses the Gentile converts to Christianity when he says, "If you will be circumcised". That implies people who have never been circumcised before. I think it is safe to say that both former Jews and former Gentiles have been drawn into the Old Covenant.
The situation we see is that a person or persons have gained entry to the church and caused this to happen. Paul mentions this in only a couple of short statements. God has not given him the details so that he can point them out.
Jews, perhaps even Jewish converts, have come into the church and turned some Jewish converts back to Judaism, and some Gentile converts have followed.
This was an ongoing problem in Christianity. In Acts 15, there is a conference of the Apostles and elders to decide this issue.
In the passage we are going to study, Paul explains two things, and along the way, makes some other valuable points.
He talks about the purpose of Judaism. Why was it there at all? Why didn't we just go straight to Christianity?
Paul also spends a lot of time talking about the inferiority of Judaism. This is perhaps the most useful part to us as it helps us see how blessed we are to be living in this time.
This passage is very difficult to understand. Paul uses some cultural references that are different from our own, so we may not understand them. He also does something that is literarily sophisticated but easily missed, leaving the reader confused. He also engages in metaphors and similes. Specifically, his culture is different in these ways:
With all I've said, I understand that some of you may not want to understand this complicated passage in all its detail. And there is a lot of detail. So, I'm going to explain it in two ways. I'll start with a simplified explanation of this passage and follow that with the full explanation. If all you want is the basics of what Paul is saying, you can stop after the simplified description. Or, if you start into the full explanation and find it is more than you wanted, then you still have the basic explanation.
The simplified explanation begins next. The full explanation begins in the next section, Full Explanation. If you want, you can skip ahead to that point. The simplified explanation might also serve as a good summary to start with.
I'm not including any verse references in this explanation of the verses because they would just confuse at this level. If you want to see the verses that say the things that I'm going to explain in this section, then you'll need to continue into the full explanation.
This is what Paul is saying, boiled down to the basics.
Children are told by adults what to do, and they must do it. They have no choice. If they don't do what they are told to do, they are punished. The rules are rigid, and there are many of them to learn.
But when the children grow up to be young adults, all of that changes. They get to have some say in what they do. They begin to take responsibility for themselves. Most importantly, they become part of the family. That last part is different from our culture, where children are always considered part of the family.
Paul says the New and Old Covenants are like this. Just as physical children have no control over their wrong behaviors, spiritual children have no control over theirs. It is their nature to do what is wrong, and it's necessary to teach them what is right.
So, God gave the Old Covenant to Israel, his chosen people, to keep them on the right track, until they were young adults.
Under this covenant, there were many rules, more than 600, by their count. When they came under that covenant, they were responsible for keeping them all, everyone. If they failed to keep any of those, they were required to make a sacrifice to atone for it.
But under the New Covenant, they are given the Holy Spirit to guide them. If they follow that guidance, they have liberty under grace. They begin to be responsible for their own actions. They begin to make their own decisions.
But this doesn't give them the liberty to sin. The liberty they have is not the freedom that most people want. Instead of being forced to do what is right and being punished if they didn't, the people in this covenant freely choose to do what is right. If they slip, grace covers the sin, and they can immediately move on.
Another part of the New Covenant is that the people become sons of God by adoption. That's more significant than we would think in our time. In Paul's time, if people were brought into the home who were not blood relatives, they were brought in as slaves.
So, Paul asks the question: Why would you want to go back to the Old Covenant? Why would you give up being treated as a young adult instead of a child? Why would you go back to living your sinful nature under a rigid law?
Paul adds a clarification to that. You can't have both covenants. If you are circumcised into the Old Covenant, you've turned away from the Messiah and his promises.
That's the point of what Paul is saying. It isn't complicated when seen this way. He says it the way he does to convince the Galatians. For us, Paul is an Apostle and therefore, is a reliable source of God's word, so we accept what he says.
There are some things that Paul isn't saying that some people think he is saying. He isn't saying the Old Covenant was evil. There are so-called Christians who want to think that.
Paul is also not saying that, if you do something Jewish, anything at all, then you are instantly under the Old Covenant. Paul specifically says, "You desire to be under the law." As with so much of Christianity, it isn't so much what you do as why you do it.
This will be the full explanation of the verses. It is very detailed and must be because Paul is speaking about many things that are not part of our culture or understanding.
Because of that, before we can even begin looking at the verses, we need a lot of background on what those differences are, so we can understand what Paul says in the way that the Galatians would have understood.
In our time, slavery is considered to be a great evil. Though none of us have ever known or seen slavery, the word conjures up images of brutality and cruelty, of people being bought and sold like cattle, and of people and children being sold into slavery forever. Slavery was never desirable, but in practice, it wasn't always like that.
Slavery also brings up images of free people captured and made into slaves. That was the European and American experience of slavery, but in Israel, the Bible said that stealing people like that was punishable by death.
In Bible times, the view of slavery was very different from what we think of slavery.
Slavery was chosen by people, yes, chosen, because it was better than the alternatives: death or extreme poverty.
It's important to understand that God does not have a problem with slavery. Unfortunately some so-called "Christians" can't stand a god who doesn't hate slavery as much as they do. This makes them enemies of God.
The important thing for this study is, if you asked Paul what "slavery" means to him, what images does it bring to his mind, how would he answer?
He would say that slavery means not having control over your life. Someone tells you what to do, and you have no choice but to do it. You don't plan for your future. You don't have responsibility for your life. You aren't so different from a child.
Another difference is the view of the place of children in the family.
There is an old expression, "Children should be seen and not heard." That thinking was part of my grandfather's generation, but less so in my father's generation. In modern families, children are treated as though they have things to say that are worthy of hearing. In fact, among liberals, the view is that children should be heard because they are uncorrupted by our society.
In Judaism, in the time of the New Testament, they lived by that old expression, "children should be seen, and not heard." Children were treated no differently than slaves. That is, "I tell you what to do, and you do it." You have no choice, and I don't want to hear any talking back. It was very common to have slaves as part of the family. This view of and treatment of children was the same for both.
The high mortality rate among children may have driven some of this thinking. Once they became old enough to have a solid chance of living a productive life, they were treated very differently.
If they were children of the family, they became the managers of the slaves. So they were moved from being like slaves to being in charge of the slaves.
If they were children of the slaves, they remained slaves but could rise to higher positions where they might be in charge of a few slaves, if they were in a household with that many slaves.
The other thing we need to understand also comes from family structure.
In New Testament Israel, there was no concept of adoption. This was also true in Greece and Rome. It just wasn't done. Bloodlines were important, and they were kept "clean." To do otherwise was a scandal. This was so true that their languages didn't even have a word for bringing an outsider into the family as if he or she were blood. Our word "adoption" comes from Latin, where it was two words that were compounded together. At some point in time, they had put together the words "to" and "choose," to make "to choose."
They had a different way of bringing outsiders into the family; that was slavery. If you were a starving child, your parents might sell you. If you had no parents, perhaps some family would take you in as a slave. That would have made sense to them. Taking someone in was a commitment that had a cost. If they took in some people and got them on their feet, those people might run off because they had no commitment to the family. Where is the value in that?
So, if you were living with a family but you were not from their bloodline, you were a slave or a hired hand. There was no adoption.
Paul is going to talk about someone outside the family becoming a son, as though a son by blood, but he doesn't have a word for that. In Aramaic, he will use a two-word phrase, that is, "placed son."
The Greek language didn't have a word for it either. They had already compounded the words "son" and "to place" to create a word to refer to a stepson. The Greek New Testament appears to create a new word for adoption by compounding two words as Latin had done. These two words are "to place" and "son." That's the same two words as they used for stepson, but in the reverse order.
TV might have made us more familiar with Italian Mafia families. If some outsider served the family well enough, he could become a "made man", essentially being adopted into the family.
We are finally ready to start looking at the verses. This will be Galatians 4 and part of Galatians 5. After we get through the main point, we'll skip a few verses where Paul laments what some in the Galatian church have done.
I say that as long as the heir is a child, he is not distinct from the Servants, though he is master over all of them; 2 But he is under guardians and stewards until the time that his father has appointed. (Galatians 4:1)
This whole passage is going to use 3 different Aramaic words. We see the first one here. All of the Aramaic words describe children but have nuanced differences that English doesn't have words for. They are all translated to the English word "Child."
This first use of "child" refers to a person who is not an adult and is therefore a slave. I discussed this concept earlier. Obviously English has no word that is even remotely like that.
Paul uses this word to make a point. Such a child is a child of the family and therefore an heir, but he does not appear to be different from the slaves, nor is he treated differently. But he is their master, though he doesn't yet have the approval to work in that role. As a child, guardians and stewards are in charge of protecting and raising him, and he does what he is told to do, as a slave does. When he is older, he will be given authority over them.
The first 4 words of Galatians 4:3 tell us about something Paul is about to do. It says:
In this way also …
These words announce a parallel or allegory that Paul is going to use. A parallel or an allegory describes connections between two different ideas. The purpose is to help us understand an unfamiliar idea in terms of a familiar idea that has all these connections.
The things that he has just said about an infant heir and his experience of childhood are going to be applied to some people in the Galatian church. This part will speak to the Jews who have become Christians but have been drawn back into Judaism.
Paul is doing this to explain the purpose of the Law of the Old Covenant. With that, he will answer the question: why was that covenant created at all?
Paul is also doing this to show the Galatians that they must not go back to the Old Covenant. He describes how much better the New Covenant is and what they would lose by doing so.
This is the parallel as far as Paul has set it up so far. In the Child Heir column are all the things that he has said about a child who is blood and thus is an heir. These will all have parallels with the unfamiliar idea he is about to explain. That will be the "Jews Who Become Christians" side of the parallel.
He says these things about the child heir:
Having told us what he is going to do with a parallel, Paul begins to set up the connections to the life of a converted Jew.
This is the whole verse of that part we looked at.
In this way also when we were children we were enslaved under the principles of the world. (Galatians 4:3)
This word "child" is a different word than we saw earlier. This one refers to infants generally. Here, Paul is using it metaphorically to refer to adults. He includes himself as having been in this group.
When he says, "principles of the world," he is referring to the principles that guide the world into sin and ultimately destruction. Paul uses this phrase in other books as well.
Paul is making his next point: Just as all children are born slaves to wrong behaviors, all adults become slaves to sin. In his letter to the church in Rome, Paul talks about this inevitability and that all will sin.
But when the end of time arrived, God sent his Son and he was from a woman and was under the Law, 5 that he would redeem those who were under the Law, and that we would receive the position of children. (Galatians 4:4-5)
This word "Child" refers to a child who is a son of the family. We've now seen all 3 of the Aramaic words that are translated as "Child."
Paul's main point here is this. At the time God had appointed, he sent Jesus to get back his people, who were enslaved under the Law, and give them, which includes us, the place or position of sons by blood.
Paul also makes a side point, saying Jesus was under the Law, just as they were, so that he could pay the cost of getting them back. Jesus was born of a woman who was under the law herself, and he was circumcised into the Old Covenant also. This means two things. First, Jesus was required to live according to the covenant, and as a person under a covenant, he cannot change the covenant. Second, and less clear to us, there was a judicial kind of need for that. It wouldn't have been sufficient for God to have Jesus born as a Greek. His death can only cover his people.
That does include us non-Jewish people, though, and Paul will get to that. We are the people of Jesus by faith.
I think it's worth noting that Jesus didn't come back to get only his enslaved people who were alive. He was also here for the enslaved dead. Some of what Paul will say next doesn't apply to them, though … because they are dead.
But because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, who cries, "Father, our Father". (Galatians 4:6)
The word "child" seen here refers, again, to children who are sons of the family
This verse uses the word "father" twice. In Greek manuscripts, the first use of "father" here retains the Aramaic word "abba," and most English translations do this as well. "Abba" isn't the only Aramaic word that appears in the Greek New Testament. There is also "Maranatha" and "Golgotha", which you should know, and also "Talitha cumi," which means "Little girl, arise". No one is certain why the Greek manuscripts retained a few Aramaic words and phrases.
The translation I'm using in this study comes from Aramaic manuscripts, where "abba" is used both times, so both are translated to English as "father."
Aside from all of that translation stuff, Paul has a point: You are child-sons, he says, therefore God gave you the Holy Spirit, who knows the father and who is known by the father.
We can now see all the connections Paul has made between the Child Heir and Jews who become Christians.
Just as a child is a slave to the usual childish behaviors, all mankind is a slave to sin.
Just as a child needs to be taught right and wrong, God's people needed to be taught right and wrong so they would not stray away from him.
Just as slaves are given authority over the child and charged with raising him, the Law was given authority over God's people to raise them.
Just as there was an appointed time that would come for the child to become an adult, Jesus came with the New Covenant and the Holy Spirit
Just as the child-son will be master over the slaves, the adult-son … now here's where a lot of people stumble, … the adult-son is master over the Law, by the Holy Spirit. This means the Christian is able to do whatever he wants and live however he wants. Paul will say that later here, and he will call it liberty … but there's a catch.
We've seen that Paul has established that Christians can live however they want because they are now adult-sons. A little later, we'll see Paul call this liberty.
As adult-sons we get to make our own decisions. But there are some so-called adult-sons who take this in the wrong direction. Most of them understand this doesn't allow them to sin, but fewer of them know why. So they use this as a reason to justify the mistakes they've made or as a reason to reject repentance for their mistakes.
They missed part of what Paul said here. Along with being adult-sons, they also have the Holy Spirit and are guided by him to want what is good. Therefore they can do anything they want, but if they are guided by the Holy Spirit, they only want what is Godly.
Just as the child-son became an adult-son who did what his father asked, we are adult-sons of God who do what our father asks.
And therefore you are not Servants but children, and if children, also the heirs of God by Yeshua the Messiah. 8 For then, when you had not known God, you served those which by their nature were not gods. 9 But now that you have known God and especially that you are known by God … (Galatians 4:7-9)
The word "child" refers to child-sons again. He is saying "you are" here, so he is still counting them as child-sons, despite what they have done.
This is Paul's point for these verses: You were slaves when you were under the Law, but now you are child-sons, and therefore, heirs. When you were slaves, you didn't know God, and you served false gods. As child-sons you know God (by the Holy Spirit) and are known by God.
Notice that Paul has been speaking to converted Jews. Now he says there was a time, before you converted, when you didn't know God and you served things that were not God. That doesn't sound like a description of Jews. Is he still speaking to converted Jews, or is he now speaking to Gentile believers? It's hard to tell, but I think he is still speaking to converted Jews.
Remember in verse 6, Paul said that the Galatians now knew God because they had the Holy Spirit within them, who knew and cried out for the Father. That means the Jews under the Law didn't ever know God, not in the way that they now could as Christians. That's also true in the sense that the Jews were unaware that there was a father. Part of Jesus' mission was to tell them about that.
But now […], you have turned again to those sick and weak principles, and you wish again to be subject to them. 10 You observe days and months and times and years. (Galatians 4:9-10)
Paul says "sick and weak principles" and "wish again to be subject." Many people have trouble understanding what he means by that. I'm going to deal with that in the next section.
Paul also says, "you observe," and he lists a bunch of time periods. There can't be any doubt from those time periods that he is referring to the feast days of the Old Testament Law.
It would be natural to think that Christians should never keep even one of the feast days. There are people who say that, and they go so far as to say that, if you do keep even one feast day, then you are no longer a Christian. That would be inconsistent with Paul's own life, where he says he desires to attend feast days.
The difference between the two is that they observe, which means they are doing it because they are following instructions on how to keep it.
As with so many other things in Christianity, it isn't so much what you do as the heart behind why you are doing it. The context in these verses is "you wish to be subject." So, Paul is saying you are keeping those days as an obligation of the Law; you have enslaved yourselves.
Part of verse 9 is difficult to understand. That part says:
you have turned again to those sick and weak principles, and you wish again to be subject to them.
What does Paul mean by "those sick and weak principles?". There are some people who want to think that these principles refer to the Old Covenant Law. For their own reasons, they despise the Old Testament and consider it of no value to Christians.
Paul used the word "those," which indicates he had referred to some things earlier. He used the word "principles" earlier in our passage, so those principles must be the same principles he refers to in this verse. Those were the principles of the world. Here, he calls them "sick and weak," which he didn't before. It makes sense to call them that now because he has gone through the parallel, showing how much better the New Covenant is, which liberated us from them.
He also referred to being enslaved to those principles. Here he says, "be subject again." Both of those line up with being child-slaves.
So Paul isn't only referring to the principles of the world, sick and weak as they are, he is also implying that those principles were the reason the Law was added, which is what he said at the start. The two go hand in hand. If you go back to those principles, you go back to the Law.
Also, verse 8 talked about worshipping false gods at that time, which points away from the Law.
With a little thought, I think it is clear that Paul doesn't mean that the Law is the "sick and weak principles." He's talking about the principles of the world being sick and weak.
His point for this part, then, is that turning back to the Law is also turning back to being enslaved to sin. He's thinking, yuck, why would you want to do that?
We are skipping ahead in the verses now. In the skipped verses, Paul laments about what they've done, basically asking … how did you do this? He says things like "I think I wasted my time on you," … and … "I'm dumbfounded," which means he is so shocked that he can't speak.
They imitate you, not for what is excellent but because they want to oppress you that you would imitate them. (Galatians 4:17)
Paul is saying the people who led them into this are tricking you. They pretend to be like you, but not so that they can edify you, make you stronger and smarter. They do it so they can lock you into the Law and make you like them.
Paul doesn't say much about the person or persons who have caused this change in the church. He doesn't know who they are, but he has seen how they have worked in other churches. From that, he can tell the Galatians how they were duped.
Skipping verse 18, we are now at verse 19.
My children, those for whom I am in labor again until the Messiah shall be formed in you.
The word that is translated as "child" refers to child-sons, again. Paul is still talking to them as though they are Christians, despite having said things like, you've turned away from the Messiah.
Paul says he is going to have to work on them some more and keep working "until the Messiah shall be formed in you." This is the process of spiritual maturation, which, over time, produces a person who is the likeness of the Messiah. In short, he means, until you have grown up in the faith. The Galatians would have to take that as a slap in the face. Having Paul say he thought they were more spiritually mature than that has to hurt.
Skipping verse 20, we get to a long section of verses where Paul presents Biblical support for what he has been saying about the Old Covenant Law versus the New Covenant. This is the first part.
Tell me, you who wish to be under the Law (Torah), do you not hear the Law (Torah)? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one from a Maidservant and one from a Freewoman. 23 But he who was from the Maidservant was born of the flesh, but he who was from the Freewoman was by the promise. 24 But these are illustrations of the two Covenants, the one that is from Mount Sinai begets to bondage, which is Hagar. 25 For Hagar is Mount Sinai that is in Arabia, and agrees with this Jerusalem and is serving in bondage and its children. 26 But that Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother. (Galatians 4:21-25)
Paul sees a deeper meaning in this story about Abraham. You and I only saw a story about a foolish and disastrous attempt to fulfill God's promise of a child for Abraham. Paul says it was an allegory for us about the Old and New Covenants, neither of which had come at that time.
Hagar's son was a slave, as she was. He represents the slavery of the Old Covenant. He represents the slavery, not the covenant. He was the result of a normal sexual union.
Hagar, the slave wife and former slave of Sarah, represents the Old Covenant. So Hagar represents the Old Covenant, and her son represents the slavery of that covenant. She also represents the earthly Jerusalem.
Sarah's son was a freeman, as Sarah was. He represents the freedom of the New Covenant. He represents the freedom, not the covenant. He was the result of a promise that God made to Abraham.
Sara, a free woman, represents the New Covenant. She also represents the New Covenant. She also represents what Paul calls "Jerusalem above."
Now, what is this "Jerusalem above" that Paul mentions? There are only two other references to it in the Bible, both in Revelation. There, it is called the New Jerusalem, and in both cases, it is described as descending down to the New Earth from Heaven. It is our future home after judgment day and after the earth and heavens are renovated to become the New Earth and New Heavens.
What's interesting here is that Paul is saying this to the Galatian church and expecting that they know what he is talking about. But the book of Revelation hasn't been written yet. How would they know? This must mean that Paul teaches all the churches about this Jerusalem above and the future New Jerusalem. We have to expect that all the apostles did the same, but for whatever reason, it isn't mentioned anywhere else in the Bible. But that's a little off-topic in this study.
Paul's point so far is that these two sons and their mothers represent the two covenants. Specifically, they represent the state of the people who are under those covenants, that is, slave or free, and also the promises of the covenants, that is, a place to live.
Paul continues speaking about these two sons and their mothers. Above, he discussed general ideas from scripture; now he quotes specific parts of scripture.
For it is written: "Rejoice, barren one, she who does not bear, triumph and shout, she who does not give birth, because the children of the desolate have increased more than the children of a wife" (Galatians 4:27)(That's a quote from Isaiah 54:1).
The wording of this verse of prophecy can be a bit unclear. The "one who does not bear children," who is barren and desolate, is Sarah, but she wasn't always barren, only until she became so old that it seemed impossible for her to bear children. And when it says, "wife," it is referring to the slave wife, Hagar.
When Paul says "increased more," he doesn't mean increased in number of people. He means an increase in what they would have. That is, the people of the New Covenant would have much more than the people of the Old Covenant. Paul is saying what he has been saying all along: the New Covenant is better. Isaiah, who spoke these words during the Old Covenant period, was saying the New Covenant would be better.
28 But we, my brethren, are children of the promise like Isaac. 29 And as then, he who was born by the flesh did persecute him who was of the Spirit, so it is now also. (Galatians 4:28-29)
Paul now says, here's how you can know this deeper meaning in the story of the two sons of Abraham is real. He says, the child of the slave wife persecuted the child of the free wife (you should remember that part of the story) the child of the slave wife persecuted the child of the free wife, just as the children of the Old Covenant now persecute the children of the New Covenant, which is what Paul's entire letter is about. The Jews have tricked the Galatian church into doing what was wrong.
30 But what do the Scriptures say? "Cast out the Maidservant and her son because the son of the Maidservant will not inherit with the son of the Freewoman" (Galatians 4:30-31)(That's a quote from Genesis 21:10). 31 We therefore, my brethren, are not children of the Maidservant, but children of the Freewoman.
I'm skipping to the next chapter now, chapter 5, to pick up a few more verses.
We talked about liberty earlier, when Paul was introducing the idea, but hadn't yet given it the name liberty. Here, he does that.
Stand therefore in that liberty with which the Messiah has set us free, and do not be yoked again in a yoke of bondage. (Galatians 5:1).
We might think that "free" means "free to do whatever we want," but it doesn't.
But you have been called to liberty, my brethren, only let not your liberty be an opportunity of the flesh, but you should be serving one another by love.
Paul contrasts two things that seem unrelated. An "opportunity of the flesh," by which he means sin, is contrasted with "serving one another." By that, he makes the point that sin is self-centered, self-pleasing, and unloving. The antidote to that is serving others in true love.
This might not seem like much freedom. Those who were enslaved to the Old Covenant weren't allowed to sin. Now, those who are in the New Covenant aren't allowed to sin. Where is the difference?
There is a huge difference. In the Old Covenant, children were taught the laws of that covenant until they reached a certain age, around age 10. At that time, they became responsible for keeping them all, everyone. In the next verses, Paul will say exactly that. The Jews have counted them, and there are more than 600. For Christians, when they become Christians, they are only responsible for keeping what they understand of the law. The expectation is that the Holy Spirit will lead them to a deeper understanding over time.
There is a consequence of this freedom that is not well understood in the church. Not only does it mean that people in the church will have different levels of understanding. It means they have different levels of accountability to God. One person may be doing something that the others know is wrong, but they are all doing what God asked. The Holy Spirit directs each person individually.
Paul now gives a summary of the consequences of the turn they have made back to the Old Covenant.
Behold, I Paul say to you that if you will be circumcised, the Messiah profits you nothing. 3 But I testify again to every person who is circumcised, that he is obligated to observe all of the Law (Torah). 4 You have been destroyed from the Messiah, those of you who are justified by that in the Law (Torah), and you have fallen from grace. 5 For we wait for the hope of righteousness by the Spirit who is of the faith. 6 For in the Messiah Yeshua, circumcision is not anything, neither is uncircumcision, only faith that is perfected in love. (Galatians 5:2-6)
He says if you turn back to the Old Covenant, you lose everything that comes from the Messiah, including eternal life.
He says, "If you are circumcised." He means "circumcised as part of entering into the Old Covenant." The medical procedure is nothing. The intent of the heart is everything.
He also says something that we discussed above. If they enter that covenant, they must observe all of the law. If they fail in any way, they are responsible for that. Paul doesn't speak about it directly, but the only way to achieve eternal life by the law was to observe it all perfectly for your entire life. No man could do that. Eternal life in that covenant was achieved only by faith in God. As Paul said from the start, the Law was added to keep and teach God's People how to live.
Paul also says that, in entering that covenant, they are separated from the Messiah. He uses the word destroyed, which we don't use that way. He means the relationship is destroyed and irreparably so. There were probably people in the Galatian church who thought they were in both covenants. Paul is saying no. They are incompatibly different.
Paul also talks about grace. The liberty of the New Covenant also commits God to showing grace to those who are in that covenant when they do things that are wrong, but they do not understand they are doing wrong.
In the Old Covenant, circumcision was key to the covenant. In the New Covenant, circumcision means nothing.
It would be unlike our God to do something that had only one purpose. So, we know there would be more than one purpose to the Old Covenant. It told everyone about God and what God wanted. It told everyone about sin. It showed that men could be inhabited by the Holy Spirit. But that was only for prophets in that covenant. It told everyone about a coming Messiah and a new covenant he would bring.
Many people have wondered why God couldn't have gone straight to the New Covenant. We needed to know the things the Old Covenant explained first. We needed to see his prophecies fulfilled to be able to trust in this God, before the Messiah would be revealed.
Also, and this might seem strange, I think Justice required that the Old Covenant be tried before such a great gift as the Holy Spirit could be given to all mankind.
But Paul only speaks of the one purpose that relates to the Galatians' problem, the purpose it had in being a covenant that would have a beginning and also an end. This purpose of the Old Testament law was to keep God's people on track until the time when the Spirit could be given, which began with the New Testament and its New Covenant.
Paul says the Old Covenant was for spiritual infants. It gave them inflexible, simple laws to live by, as children need because they are unable to escape their nature, which leads them to do wrong. But it anticipated the New Covenant, where spiritual young adults would begin to choose what was good for themselves. So Paul explains this to the Galatians.
He says the New Covenant gives liberty, which is better than the slavery of the Old Covenant. As former Jews, they would have wondered where the Bible said there was going to be another covenant and that the Old Covenant was slavery. Paul answers that by saying the sons of Abraham were a sign that there would be two covenants, one that was slavery and one that was free.
But Paul also warns them not to let that liberty be a justification for doing evil.
For more Biblical support, Paul reminds them of the Old Testament references to a New Jerusalem. He says that the Old Jerusalem, which was the city they knew, is the Jerusalem of slavery, but the New Jerusalem will be free.
Paul also seems to be addressing the reasoning the Galatians used when they decided to be circumcised into the Old Covenant. I'm sure they never thought to themselves, "Hey, let's dump Jesus and all his promises and the Holy Spirit and go back to the Old Covenant." They would have told themselves that what they were doing was going to make them into better Christians.
Paul says they cannot have a foot in both covenants. The covenants are as different as slaves and free men, and they are not compatible. Therefore some of the Galatians have turned away from the Messiah.
Some people in our time take that to mean that, if you do anything that is part of the Old Covenant, then you have automatically lost the Messiah. That isn't correct. The New Testament has a few references that say the Ten Commandments are still valid. Honoring your father and mother cannot be turning away from the Messiah. Elsewhere, Paul says the Old Covenant law is good if it is used rightly.
It's a matter of the heart. What do you intend to do? For the Galatians, the question was: what do you intend to do with the Old Covenant laws? Paul said the Galatians desired to be under the law when they were circumcised. Therefore they were being circumcised into the Old Covenant. Because it isn't possible to be in both covenants, they had turned away from the Messiah.