Albert Barnes Commentary Galatians 3

GALATIANS CHAPTER III

The address of Paul to Peter, as I suppose, was closed at the last verse of chapter 2. The apostle in this chapter, in a direct address to the Galatians, pursues the argument on the subject of justification by faith. In the previous chapters he had shown them fully that he had received his views of the gospel directly from the Lord Jesus, and that he had the concurrence of the most eminent among the apostles themselves. He proceeds to state more fully what his views were; to confirm them by the authority of the Old Testament; and to show the necessary effect of an observance of the laws of Moses on the great doctrine of justification by faith. This subject is pursued through this chapter and the following. This chapter comprises the following subjects:—

1. A severe reproof of the Galatians for having been so easily seduced by the arts of cunning men from the simplicity of the gospel (Galatians 3:1). He says that Christ had been plainly set forth crucified among them, and it was strange that they had so soon been led astray from the glorious doctrine of salvation by faith.

2. He appeals to them to show that the great benefits which they had received had not been in consequence of the observance of the Mosaic rites, but had come solely by the hearing of the gospel (Galatians 3:2–6). Particularly the Holy Spirit, with all His miraculous and converting and sanctifying influences, had been imparted only in connection with the gospel. This was the most rich and most valuable endowment which they had ever received; and this was solely by the preaching of Christ and Him crucified.

3. In illustration of the doctrine of justification by faith, and in proof of the truth of it, he refers to the case of Abraham, and shows that he was justified in this manner, and that the Scripture had promised that others would be justified in the same way (Galatians 3:6–9).

4. He shows that the law pronounced a curse on all those who were under it, and that consequently it was impossible to be justified by it. But Christ had redeemed us from that curse, having taken the curse on Himself, so that now we might be justified in the sight of God. In this way, he says, the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles, and they all might be saved in the same manner that he was (Galatians 3:10–14).

5. This view he confirms by showing that the promise made to Abraham was made before the giving of the law. It was a mode of justification in existence before the law of Moses was given. It was of the nature of a solemn compact or covenant on the part of God. It referred particularly to the Messiah, and to the mode of justification in Him. And as it was of the nature of a covenant, it was impossible that the law given many years after could disannul it, or render it void (Galatians 3:15–18).

6. It might then be asked, what was the use of the law? Why was it given? It was added, Paul says, on account of transgressions, and was designed to restrain men from sin, and to show them their guilt. It was, further, not superior to the promise of a Mediator, or to the Mediator; for it was appointed by the instrumentality of angels, and it was in the hands of the Mediator Himself, under Him, and subject to Him. It could not, therefore, be superior to Him, and to the plan of justification through Him (Galatians 3:19, 20).

7. Yet Paul answers an important objection here, and a very obvious and significant inquiry: Does he mean to teach that the law of God is contradictory to His promises? Are the law and the gospel rival systems? Is it necessary, in order to hold to the excellence of the one, to hold that the other is contradictory, evil, and worthless?

   To all this he answers: by no means. He says the fault was not in the law. The view which he had taken, and which was revealed in the Bible, arose from the nature of the case. The law was as good a law as could be made, and it answered all the purposes of law.

   It was so excellent, that if it had been possible that men could be justified by law at all, that was the law by which it would have been done. But it was not possible. The effect of the law, therefore, was to show that all men were sinners, and to shut them up to the plan of justification by the work of a Redeemer. It was appointed, therefore, not to justify men, but to lead them to the Saviour (Galatians 3:21–24).

8. The effect of the plan of justification by faith in the Lord Jesus was to make the mind free. It was no longer under a schoolmaster. Those who are justified in this way become the children of God. They all become one in the Redeemer. There is neither Jew nor Greek, but they constitute one great family, and are the children of Abraham, and heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:25–29).

O foolish Galatians. That is, foolish for having yielded to the influence of the false teachers, and for having embraced doctrines that tended to subvert the gospel of the Redeemer. The original word here used, anohtai, signifies 'void of understanding'; and they had shown it in a remarkable manner by rejecting the doctrine of the apostles and embracing the errors into which they had fallen. It will be remembered that this is an expression similar to what was applied to them by others (see the Introduction, § I). For example, Callimachus, in his hymns, calls them "a foolish people," and Hillary, himself a Gaul, calls them Gallos indociles—expressions remarkably in accordance with that used here by Paul. It is implied that they lacked stability of character. The particular thing to which Paul refers here is that they were so easily led astray by the arguments of the false teachers.

Who hath bewitched you. The word here used, ebaskane, properly means to prate about anyone; and then to mislead by pretenses, as if by magic arts; to fascinate; to influence by a charm. The idea here is that they had not been led by reason and by sober judgment, but that there must have been some charm or fascination to have taken them away in this manner from what they had embraced as true, and what they had the fullest evidence was true. Paul had sufficient confidence in them to believe that they had not embraced their present views under the unbiased influence of judgment and reason, but that there must have been some fascination or charm by which it was done. It was, in fact, accomplished by the arts and the plausible pretenses of those who came from among the Jews.

That ye should not obey the truth. The truth of the gospel. That you should yield your minds to falsehood and error. It should be observed, however, that this phrase is missing in many manuscripts. It is omitted in the Syriac version; and many of the most important Greek and Latin Fathers omit it. Mill thinks it should be omitted; and Griesbach has omitted it. It is not essential to the meaning of the passage; and it conveys no truth which is not elsewhere taught fully. It is apparently added to show what was the effect of their being bewitched or enchanted.

Before whose eyes. In whose very presence. That is, it has been done so clearly that you might be said to have seen it.

Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth. By the preaching of the gospel. He has been so fully and plainly preached that you might be said to have seen Him. The effect of His being preached in the manner in which it has been done ought to have been as great as if you had seen Him crucified before your eyes.

The word rendered "hath been evidently set forth," proegraphē, properly means to write before, and then to announce beforehand in writing; or to announce by posting up on a tablet. The meaning here is, probably, that Christ had been announced among them crucified, as if the doctrine was set forth in a public written tablet.—Robinson's Lex.

There was the utmost clearness and distinctness of view, so that they did not need to make any mistake in regard to Him. The Syriac renders it, "Christ has been crucified before your eyes as if He had been represented by painting." According to this, the idea is that it was as plain as if there had been a representation of Him by a picture. This has been done chiefly by preaching. I see no reason, however, to doubt that Paul means also to include the celebration of the Lord's Supper, in which the Lord Jesus is so clearly exhibited as a crucified Saviour.

Crucified among you? That is, represented among you as crucified. The words "among you," however, are missing in many manuscripts and obscure the sense. If they are to be retained, the meaning is that the representations of the Lord Jesus, as crucified, had been as clear and impressive among them as if they had seen Him with their own eyes.

The argument is that they had so clear a representation of the Lord Jesus, and of the design of His death, that it was strange that they had so soon been perverted from the belief of it. Had they seen the Saviour crucified; had they stood by the cross and witnessed His agony in death on account of sin, how could they doubt what was the design of His dying, and how could they be seduced from faith in His death, or be led to embrace any other method of justification?

How could they now do it, when, although they had not seen Him die, they had the fullest knowledge of the object for which He gave His precious life? The doctrine taught in this verse is that a faithful exhibition of the sufferings and death of the Saviour ought to exert an influence over our minds and hearts as if we had seen Him die; and that those to whom such an exhibition has been made should avoid being led astray by the blandishments of false doctrines and by the arts of man. Had we seen the Saviour expire, we could never have forgotten the scene. Let us endeavor to cherish a remembrance of His sufferings and death as if we had seen Him die.

This only would I learn of you. I would ask this of you: still retaining the language of severe reproof. The design here, and in the following verses, is to prove to them that the views they had at first embraced were correct, and that the views they now cherished were false.

To show them this, he asks them the simple question: By what means had they obtained the exalted privileges they enjoyed? Had they obtained them by the simple gospel, or by the observance of the law? The word "only" here, monon, implies that this was enough to settle the question.

The argument to which he was about to appeal was enough for his purpose; he did not need to go any further. They had been converted. They had received the Holy Spirit. They had had abundant evidence of their acceptance with God; and the simple matter of inquiry now was whether this had occurred as the regular effect of the gospel, or whether it had been by obeying the law of Moses.

Did you receive the Spirit? This refers to the Holy Spirit. He refers here, doubtless, to all the manifestations of the Spirit that had been made to them: in renewing the heart, in sanctifying the soul, in comforting them in affliction, and in his miraculous agency among them. The Holy Spirit had been conferred on them at their conversion (Acts 10:44; Acts 11:16), and this was to them proof of the favour of God and of their being accepted by him.

By the works of the law. This means by obeying the law of Moses or any law. It was in no way connected with their obeying the law. This must have been so clear to them that no one could have any doubt on the subject. The inestimably rich and precious gift of the Holy Spirit had not been conferred on them as a consequence of their obeying the law.

Or by the hearing of faith? This means in connection with hearing the gospel, which requires faith as a condition of salvation. The Holy Spirit was sent down only in connection with the preaching of the gospel. It was a matter of truth, and one which could not be denied, that those influences had not been imparted under the law but had been connected with the gospel of the Redeemer.

(Compare to Acts 2) The doctrine taught in this verse is that the benefits resulting to Christians from the gift of the Holy Spirit are enough to prove that the gospel is from God, and therefore true. This was the case with regard to the miraculous endowments communicated by the Holy Spirit in the early ages of the church; for the miracles that were wrought, the knowledge of languages imparted, and the conversion of thousands from the error of their ways, proved that the system was from heaven; and it is true now.

Every Christian has had ample proof, from the influences of the Spirit on his heart and around him, that the system which is attended with such benefits is from heaven. His own renewed heart, his elevated and sanctified affections, his exalted hopes, his consolations in trial, his peace in the prospect of death, and the happy influences of the system around him in the conversion of others and in the intelligence, order, and purity of the community, are ample proof that the religion is true.

Such effects do not come from any attempt to keep the law; they result from no other system. No system of infidelity produces them; no mere system of infidelity can produce them. It is only by that pure system which proclaims salvation by the grace of God, which announces salvation by the merits of the Lord Jesus, that such effects are produced. The Saviour promised the Holy Spirit to descend after his ascension to heaven to apply his work; and everywhere, under the faithful preaching of the simple gospel, that Spirit keeps up the evidence of the truth of the system by his influences on the hearts and lives of men.

Are you so foolish? Can it be that you are so unwise? The idea is that Paul hardly thought it credible that they could have pursued such a course. They had so cordially embraced the gospel when he preached to them, they had given such evidence that they were under its influence, that he regarded it as hardly possible that they should have so far abandoned it as to embrace such a system as they had done.

Having begun in the Spirit. That is, when the gospel was first preached to them. They had begun their professed Christian life under the influence of the Holy Spirit and with the pure and spiritual worship of God. They had known the power and spirituality of the glorious gospel. They had been renewed by the Spirit, sanctified in some measure by Him, and had submitted themselves to the spiritual influences of the gospel.

Are you now made perfect. Tindal renders this, "you would now end." The word here used, epitelew, means, properly, to bring through to an end, to finish; and the sense here has probably been expressed by Tindal. The idea of perfecting, in the sense in which we now use that word, is not implied in the original. It is that of finishing, ending, completing; and the sense is,

"You began your Christian career under the elevated and spiritual influences of Christianity, a system so pure and so exalted above the carnal ordinances of the Jews. Having begun thus, can it be that you are finishing your Christian course, or carrying it on to completion by the observance of those ordinances, as if they were more pure and elevating than Christianity? Can it be that you regard them as an advance on the system of the gospel?"

By the flesh. By the observance of the carnal rites of the Jews—for so the word here evidently means. This has not been an uncommon thing. Many have been professedly converted by the Spirit and have soon fallen into the observance of mere rites and ceremonies, and depended mainly on them for salvation.

Many churches have begun their career in an elevated and spiritual manner and have ended in the observance of mere forms. So many Christians begin their course in a spiritual manner and end it "in the flesh" in another sense. They soon conform to the world. They are brought under the influence of worldly appetites and propensities.

They forget the spiritual nature of their religion, and they live for the indulgence of ease and for the gratification of the senses. They build themselves houses, and they "plant vineyards," and they collect around them the instruments of music, and the bowl and the wine are in their feasts, and they surrender themselves to luxury of living; and it seems as if they intended to perfect their Christianity by drawing around them as much of the world as possible.

The beautiful simplicity of their early piety is gone. The blessedness of those moments when they lived by simple faith has fled. The times when they sought all their consolation in God are no more; and they now seem to differ from the world only in form. I dread to see a Christian inherit much wealth, or even to be thrown into very prosperous business.

I see in it a temptation to build himself a splendid mansion and to collect around him all that constitutes luxury among the people of the world. How natural for him to feel that if he has wealth like others, he should show it in a similar manner! And how easy for the most humble and spiritually-minded Christian, in the beginning of his Christian life, to become conformed to the world (such is the weakness of human nature in its best forms), and having begun in the Spirit, to end in the flesh!

Have you suffered so many things in vain? Paul reminds them of what they had endured on account of their attachment to Christianity. He assures them that if the opinions for which they had suffered were false, then their sufferings had been in vain.

These sufferings were of no use to them—for what advantage was it to suffer for a false opinion? The opinions for which they had suffered had not been those which they now embraced. They were not those connected with the observance of the Jewish rites.

They had suffered on account of their having embraced the gospel—the system of justification by a crucified Redeemer; and now, if those views were wrong, their sufferings had been wholly in vain. See this argument pursued at much greater length in 1 Corinthians 15:18, 19, 29-32.

If it is yet in vain. That is, "I trust it is not in vain. I hope you have not so far abandoned the gospel that all your sufferings on its behalf have been of no avail. I believe the system is true; and if true, and you are sincere Christians, it will not be in vain that you have suffered on its behalf, though you have gone astray. I trust that although your principles have been shaken, they have not been wholly overthrown, and that you will yet reap the reward of your having suffered so much on account of the gospel."

He therefore that ministereth, etc. This verse contains substantially a repetition of the argument in verse 2. The argument is, that the gift of the Holy Spirit to them was not imparted in consequence of the observance of the law of Moses, but in connection with the preaching of the gospel.

By the word "he," in this place, Clarke, Doddridge, Bloomfield, Chandler, Locke, and many others, suppose that the apostle means himself. Bloomfield says that it is the common opinion of "all the ancient commentators." But this seems to me a strange opinion. The obvious reference, it seems to me, is to God, who had furnished or imparted to them the remarkable influences of the Holy Spirit; and this had been done in connection with the preaching of the gospel, and not by the observance of the law.

If, however, it refers to Paul, it means that he had been made the agent or instrument in imparting to them those remarkable endowments, and that this had been done by one who had not enforced the necessity of obeying the law of Moses, but who had preached to them the simple gospel.