Albert Barnes Commentary Galatians 4:24

"Which things contain an allegory: for these [women] are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar." — Galatians 4:24 (ASV)

Which things. The different accounts of Ishmael and Isaac.

Are an allegory. This phrase means they may be regarded allegorically, or as illustrating great principles regarding the condition of slaves and freemen. Therefore, they may be used to illustrate the effect of servitude to the law of Moses compared with the freedom of the gospel. The author does not mean to say that the historical record of Moses was not true, or was merely allegorical; nor does he mean to say that Moses meant this to be an allegory, or that he intended that it should be applied to the exact purpose for which Paul applied it.

No such design is apparent in the narrative of Moses, and it is evident that he had no such intention. Nor can it be shown that Paul means to be understood as saying that Moses had any such design, or that his account was not a record of a plain historical fact.

Paul uses it as he would any other historical fact that would illustrate the same principle. He makes no more use of it than the Saviour did in his parables of real or fictitious narratives to illustrate an important truth, or than we always do of real history to illustrate an important principle.

The word used here by Paul, allhgorew, is derived from allov (another) and agoreuw (to speak, to speak openly or in public) — Passow. It properly means to speak anything differently than it is understood (Passow); to speak allegorically; to allegorize. The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, nor is it found in the Septuagint, though it occurs often in classical writers.

An allegory is a continued metaphor (see Blair's Lectures, xv). It is a figurative sentence or discourse in which the principal object is described by another subject resembling it in its properties and circumstances — Webster. Allegories are in words what hieroglyphics are in painting. The distinction between a parable and an allegory is said to be that a parable is a supposed history to illustrate some important truth (such as the parable of the good Samaritan, etc.), while an allegory is based on real facts.

It is not probable, however, that this distinction is always carefully observed. Sometimes the allegory is based on the resemblance to some inanimate object, as in the beautiful allegory in Psalm 80. Allegories, parables, and metaphors abound in the writings of the East. Truth was more easily treasured up in this way and could be better preserved and transmitted when connected with an interesting story. The lively imagination of the people of the East also led them to this mode of communicating truth, though a love for it is probably found in human nature. The best-sustained allegory of any considerable length in the world is, doubtless, Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress; and yet this is among the most popular of all books.

The ancient Jews were exceedingly fond of allegories and even turned a considerable part of the Old Testament into allegory. The ancient Greek philosophers also favored this mode of teaching. Pythagoras instructed his followers in this manner, and this was common among the Greeks and was much imitated by the early Christians — Calmet.

Many of the Christian fathers, of the school of Origen, made the Old Testament almost wholly allegorical and found mysteries in the plainest narratives. The Bible thus became for them a book of enigmas, and exegesis consisted in an ingenious and fanciful accommodation of all the narratives in the Scriptures to events in subsequent times.

On this principle, the most fanciful and ingenious man was the best interpreter. Since any man might attach any hidden mystery he chose to the Scriptures, they became wholly useless as an infallible guide.

Better principles of interpretation now prevail. The great truth has gone forth, never more to be recalled: that the Bible is to be interpreted on the same principles as all other books, that its language is to be investigated by the same laws as language in all other books, and that no more liberty is to be taken in allegorizing the Scriptures than may be taken with Herodotus or Livy.

It is always lawful to use narratives of real events to illustrate important principles. Such a use is often made of history, and such a use, I suppose, the apostle Paul makes here of an important fact in Old Testament history.

For these are. These may be used to represent the two covenants. The apostle could not mean that the sons of Sarah and Hagar were literally the two covenants; for this could not be true, and the declaration would be unintelligible. In what sense could Ishmael be called a covenant?

The meaning, therefore, must be that they furnished an apt illustration or representation of the two covenants; they would show what the nature of the two covenants was. The words "are" and "is" are often used in this sense in the Bible, to denote that one thing represents another. Thus, in the institution of the Lord's Supper: Take, eat; this Is my body (Matthew 26:26); that is, this represents my body.

The bread was not the living body that was then before them. So, in what is written, This is my blood of the new covenant (Galatians 4:28); that is, this represents my blood. The wine in the cup could not be the living blood of the Redeemer that was then flowing in his veins. (See Barnes on Genesis 41:26).

The two covenants. (Marginal note: testaments). The word here means covenants or compacts. (See Barnes on 1 Corinthians 11:25).

The two covenants referred to here are the one on Mount Sinai made with the Jews, and the other that which is made with the people of God in the gospel. The one resembles the condition of bondage in which Hagar and her son were; the other, the condition of freedom in which Sarah and Isaac were.

The one from the mount Sinai. (Marginal note: Sin). The Greek is Sina, though the word may be written either way.

Which gendereth to bondage. This means that which tends to produce bondage or servitude. That is, the laws are stern and severe, and their observance is costly and onerous, like a state of bondage. (See Barnes on Acts 15:10).

Which is Agar: Hagar would appropriately represent this. The condition of servitude produced by the law strongly resembled her condition as a slave.