The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the GalatiansFindlay, George G. (George Gillanders)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the Galatians
Findlay, George G. (George Gillanders)
Bible. Galatians -- Commentaries
I. Now when a man has made a testament, and it has been
ratified--"proved," as we should say--_it stands good for ever_.
No one has afterwards any power to set it aside, or to attach
to it a new codicil, modifying its previous terms. There it
stands--a document complete and unchangeable (ver. 15).
Such a testament God gave "to Abraham and his seed." It was
"ratified" (or "confirmed") by the final attestation made to
the patriarch after the supreme trial of his faith in the
sacrifice of Isaac: "By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord,
that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying multiply
thy seed as the stars of heaven; ... and in thy seed shall all
the nations of the earth be blessed."[92] In human testaments
the ratification takes place through another; but God "having
no greater," yet "to show to the heirs of the promise the
immutability of His counsel" confirmed it by His own oath.
Nothing was wanting to mark the Abrahamic covenant with an
indelible character, and to show that it expressed an unalterable
purpose in the mind of God.
[92] Gen. xxii. 16-18; Heb. vi. 17.
With such Divine asseveration "were the promises spoken to Abraham,
and _his seed_." This last word diverts the Apostle's thoughts for a
moment, and he gives a side-glance at the person thus designated in
the terms of the promise. Then he returns to his former statement,
urging it home against the Legalists: "Now this is what I mean:
a testament previously ratified by God, the Law which dates four
hundred and thirty years later cannot annul, so as to abrogate the
Promise" (ver. 17). The bearing of Paul's argument is now perfectly
clear. He is using the promise to Abraham to overthrow the supremacy
of the Mosaic law. The Promise was, he says, the prior settlement.
No subsequent transaction could invalidate it or disqualify those
entitled under it to receive the inheritance. That testament lies at
the foundation of the sacred history. The Jew least of all could deny
this. How could such an instrument be set aside? Or what right has
any one to limit it by stipulations of a later date?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account