Albert Barnes Commentary Galatians 4:3

"So we also, when we were children, were held in bondage under the rudiments of the world:" — Galatians 4:3 (ASV)

Even so we. We who were Jews—for I think the word here is to be limited, and not extended to the Gentiles, as Bloomfield supposes. The reasons for limiting it are:

1. that the Gentiles in no sense had such a relationship to the law and promises of God as is supposed here;

2. such an interpretation would not be relevant to Paul's purpose. He is stating reasons why there should not be subjection to the laws of Moses, and his argument is that that condition was like that of minority.

When we were children, nēpioi. Minors. (See Barnes on Galatians 4:1).

The word is not huioi—sons; but the idea is that they were in a state of minority; and though heirs, yet were under severe discipline and regimen. They were under a kind of government that was suited to that state, and not to the condition of those who had entered into their inheritance.

Were in bondage. In a state of servitude. Treated as servants or slaves.

Under the elements of the world. The marginal reading is rudiments. The word translated "elements" (singular, stoicheion) properly means a row or series; a small step; a pin or peg, like the gnomon of a sundial; and then anything elementary, such as a sound or a letter.

It then denotes the elements or rudiments of any kind of instruction, and in the New Testament is applied to the first lessons or principles of religion (Hebrews 5:1).

It is applied to the elements or component parts of the physical world (2 Peter 3:10, 12). Here the figure is maintained in the reference to the infant (Galatians 4:1, 3); and the idea is that lessons were taught under the Jewish system adapted to their minority—to a state of childhood.

They were treated as children under tutors and governors. The phrase "the elements of the world" also occurs in Colossians 2:8, 20. In Galatians 4:9 of this chapter, Paul speaks of these lessons as beggarly elements, referring to the same thing here.

Different opinions have been held as to the reason why the Jewish institutions are here called "the elements of the world." Rosenmüller supposes it was because many of those rites were common to the Jews and to the Gentiles—as they also had altars, sacrifices, temples, libations, etc.

Doddridge supposes it was because those rites were adapted to the low conceptions of children, who are most affected with sensible objects, and have no taste for spiritual and heavenly things.

Locke supposes it was because those institutions did not lead them beyond this world, or into the possession and taste of their heavenly inheritance.

It is probable that there is an allusion to the Jewish way of speaking, so common in the Scriptures, where this world is opposed to the kingdom of God, and where it is spoken of as transient and worthless compared with the future glory.

The world is fading, unsatisfactory, temporary. In allusion to this common use of the word, the Jewish institutions are called the worldly rudiments.

It is not that they were in themselves evil—for that is not true; it is not that they were adapted to foster a worldly spirit—for that is not true; it is not that they had their origin from this world—for that is not true; nor is it from the fact that they resembled the institutions of the Gentile world—for that is equally untrue; but it is that, like the things of the world, they were transient, temporary, and of little value.

They were unsatisfactory in their nature, and were soon to pass away and to give place to a better system—as the things of this world are soon to give place to heaven.