Verse 24
Paul then interpreted these events figuratively. Note that he said the story "contained" an allegory, not "was" an allegory (lit. "which things are allegorized"). [Note: See Robertson, 4:306-7.] He acknowledged the historicity of the events. Paul saw in this story an illustration of the conflict between Judaism and Christianity, nomism and spirituality. He was calling allegory what we refer to as analogy. An "allegory," as we use that term today, is a story in which the events are not historical.
"Since the kind of OT exegesis found in this passage is by no means generally characteristic of Paul, the natural inference is that there was a special reason for its use here. The reason is not far to seek: if the Judaizers in Galatia were using a similar kind of argument to persuade the Christians that sonship to Abraham entailed circumcision and observance of the law, it would be especially appropriate for Paul to turn his opponents’ own weapons against them." [Note: Fung, p. 219.]
"The gospel is the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham that in him and his offspring all nations would be blessed (cf. Galatians 3:8; Galatians 3:16). The law, which was given later, was a parenthetical dispensation introduced by God for a limited purpose; its validity continued only until the promise to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ, and even while it was valid it did not modify the terms of the promise (cf. Galatians 3:17-25)." [Note: Bruce, p. 219.]
Be the first to react on this!
