The Fullness Of Time
Chapter Seven
Israel's Condition Under The Law
It Belonged to the Old Creation
Once it is understood that Paul's concern in this Epistle is to show the objective, redemptive-historical, significance of the law in preparing men for the advent of Christ, rather than to describe the present, subjective experience of being "led to Christ" as individual sinners, through the instrumentality of the law20, several truths become readily apparent. Not the least of these is the fact that the law (Mosaic economy) was never intended to continue beyond the coming of the seed to whom the promises were made--It was added. . .till the seed should come to whom the promises were made" (3:19). The same truth is established in 3:25 and 4:2 cf.4:4. When, in 3:25, Paul writes, "but now that [the] faith has come we are no longer under a child trainer," his reference is not to subjective faith in Christ, but to objective truth about Christ. The same is true when, in 4:2, he makes reference to "the time set by the father", cf. "when the fullness of the time had come," (4:4), it is clear that he has reference to the end of one epoch and the beginning of another--"underage children are under tutors and governors until the time appointed by the father, even so we (Israelites) were enslaved under the elemental principles of the world (in this case, the Mosaic economy), but, when the fullness of the time came. . . ." Thus, it is not pre- and post-conversion experiences that Paul is contrasting but rather two different epochs. When, in Galatians 3:3, Paul writes, "Are you so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect by the flesh?" he is not to be understood to mean "are you now seeking to be made perfect by that which is ethically improper," but "are you (although belonging to the new creation, as evidenced by your reception of the Spirit, 3:2, cf.4:6) seeking to be made perfect according to principles belonging to the old order (an order characterized by weakness) of things?" He is saying, "The old order has ceased; the new has been inaugurated. Why are you still clinging to the old?"
The old order was in force during the period of time "before (the) faith, i.e., the full-blown revelation of God's gracious purpose in Christ, came," 3:23; the period of minority (under the curse of the law-- 3:10, under the law-- 3:23, under the child-trainer--3:24, under tutors and governors--4:2-3), for the people of God, and a period of bondage under the elemental principles of the world--4:3,9. The new order has now begun. It is in force during that period of time which Paul describes by the phrases "after faith has come"--3:25; "the fullness of the time"--4:4, cf. the time set beforehand by the father--4:2, and which is characterized by liberty in the Spirit--4:6-7. It is two ages that Paul is concerned with, not two periods in the individual's life, e.g.,"the law was our schoolmaster before we, as individuals, believed, for the purpose of bringing us to faith in Christ." It is rather, "the law was our (those under the law) child-trainer until Christ came." Now that Christ has come, the child has come of age. The "child-trainer," the old covenant or law, has now fulfilled his function and no longer has authority over the heir.
The second truth that becomes obvious when the passage is approached from the standpoint of the history of redemption is that Paul is contrasting the inferiority of the old covenant with the superiority of the new. Paul's argument reflects the inferiority of the old covenant in several ways.
First, it was incapable of altering the covenant made with Abraham in any way. It was an "add on" that could not add to or detract from the covenant which had already been confirmed with Abraham. It was intended, not to change that covenant in any way, but to aid in its fulfillment by showing the absolute inability of fallen men to ever be right with God apart from the covenant of promise which finds its fulfillment in Christ.
A second indication that Paul regarded the Mosaic covenant as being inferior to the covenants of promise is his mention of the mediators (both human and angelic, see also Acts 7:53; Heb 2:2) through whom the law was given (Gal 3:19-20). William Hendriksen has written,
The lesson, then, which Paul is teaching the Galatians is clearly this: The law given at Sinai . . . is inferior to the promise, for while the law came indirectly from God to His people, the promise was made to Abraham (and thus to all believers) directly by God Himself (Hendriksen 1971,142).
To the same effect, Burton succinctly states, "The intent of the whole phrase is to depreciate the law as not given directly by God" (Burton 1980,189).
A third indication that Paul regarded the Mosaic covenant as an inferior covenant is that he characterizes its subjects as living under what John Brown has called "uneasy confinement" (Brown n.d.,71). In Gal 3:23-4, Paul describes the state of Israel under the law (Mosaic covenant), not, as has often been taught, the pre-conversion state of the individual sinner (see p.xx).
In these verses, Paul makes it plain that the state of Israel, under the law, was not a condition that any right minded individual would wish to experience. In Gal 4:1-3, he likens their situation to that of an under-aged heir who was no better off than a bond-slave. He then contrasts that situation with the liberty that both believing Jews and Gentiles experience under grace (4:5-7,cf.9; 5:1). Paul's primary point in these verses is not that the law was harsh and cruel, but that it was a preparatory confinement of Israel and was, therefore, temporary. There are three words that Paul uses in these verses that illustrate that preparatory confinement. They are sugkleio (shut up),phroureo (guarded), and paidagogos (boy leader or child trainer).
The word sugkleio is used in the Septuagint for closing the womb, being enclosed or entangled in the wilderness, a gate being shut tightly, breaches being closed, being locked up, imprisoning or confining someone, besieging a city, being dumb, i.e., having the mouth shut up, being overlaid (as with gold), and being delivered or handed over.
In the Koine period, the word was used for shutting together, enclosing, putting in prison, locking up.
The word is used only four times in the New Testament. Once in the Gospels (Luke 5:6) it is used of a net enclosing a great multitude of fish. In Rom 11:32 it is used of Jews and Gentiles being shut up together in unbelief. Finally, it is used twice in Gal 3:22-23.
The word phroureo is used only four times in the Septuagint. There it denotes being locked up, garrisoned, or guarded (Hatch and Redpath 1954.1440).
In the Koine period the word carried the idea of "guarding," "protecting"-- according to Moulton and Milligan, it is used, for example, of the watchers of a vineyard and of a garrison keeping ward over a town (Moulton &. Milligan 1963,667). Apart from its occurrence in Gal 3:23, it is used three times in the New Testament. In 2 Cor 11:32 it is used of Aretas the king guarding Damascus to keep Paul from escaping. In Phil 4:7 it is used of the peace of God keeping, i.e., protecting or guarding, men's hearts and minds. Finally, in 1 Pet 1:5 it is used of believers being kept from apostasy by the power of God.
Of the two words considered thus far, phroureo carries a more positive connotation. It seems to convey the idea of "protective custody," while the word sugkleio communicates the more negative connotation of being kept in jail. It is, nonetheless, clear that both words convey the idea of confinement.
A third word that Paul uses in these verses to illustrate the condition of Israel under the law is paidagogos. The A.V. translation of this word, i.e., "schoolmaster," (Gal 3:24), has led to a widespread misunderstanding of Paul's teaching in this passage. The verse has been used to show that the law must be preached to individual sinners to prepare them for the preaching of the gospel. The law teaches them that they are sinners and thus brings them to Christ.21
The paidagogos (child trainer) is to be distinguished from the didaskalos (teacher). The function of the former was not to teach, but to discipline and control a boy until he reached maturity. According to Liddell and Scott, in classical Greek paidagogos referred to "the attendant or trainer of boys, the slave who went with a boy from home to school and back again . . ."(L.&.S. 1961,1286).
Plato wrote concerning the relationship of a child under a paidagogos,
Well, what reason can they have for so strangely preventing you from being happy and doing what you like? Why do they maintain you all the day long in constant servitude to somebody, so that, in a word, you do hardly a single thing that you desire? And thus, it would seem, you get no advantage from all your great possessions--nay, anyone else controls them rather than you--nor from your own person, though so well born, which is shepherded and managed by another; . . .(Plato,208)
Moulton and Milligan cite references to the paidagogos that describe him as "an attendant who did not merely conduct the boy to school, but had a general charge of him as tutor in the old sense of the word, until he reached maturity" (M.&.M 1963,473).
The word only occurs three times in the New Testament; twice in Galatians (3:24-5) and once in 1 Cor 4:15, where Paul writes, "For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ. . ." (N.A.S.B.).
There are at least four significant characteristics of the relationship between the child and his "paidagogos" (boy-leader or child trainer) that illustrate the relationship of Israel to and the condition of Israel under the Mosaic law. It was a temporary, elementary, confining, and rigorous relationship. All of these factors taken together clearly evidence the inferiority of the old covenant to the new.
Paul's argument in Gal 3:19-4:7 demonstrates, quite convincingly, that the law (the Mosaic law as a covenant) was never intended to be either universal or permanent. He states in Gal 3:19 that the Mosaic law had both a terminus a quo (it was added . . .) and a terminus ad quem (till the seed should come. . . .) God never intended for the Mosaic economy to be perpetual. In Gal 3:24, Paul wrote, "Therefore, the law has become our child trainer until (eis--used temporally) Christ." (Notice that the words "to bring us" A.V. have been supplied by the translators). He then continues, "But now that (the) faith has come, we are no longer under a child trainer.
In Galatians 3:26-29, Paul offers the rationale for the statement that he has made in 3:25, that we (Jews) are no longer under a child trainer. "For, " Paul writes, " you (Gentile believers) are all sons of God, through faith in Christ"(v. 25). What, it may be asked, has the adoption of Gentile believers to do with the relationship of old covenant believers to the law?
This seems to be the apostle's answer. The blessings of the new covenant could never have been realized among the Gentiles as long as the old covenant was in place. If, therefore, Gentile believers are enjoying the blessings of the new covenant, one of which is adoption (I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people), then the old covenant must have been displaced, having been fulfilled by Christ. In v.27, Paul explains that this blessing comes to "all of them" as believers, by virtue of their "in Christ" relationship--"For as many as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ". It is "in Christ" that ethnic, social, and gender distinctions (with respect to a person's approach to God) have been done away (vv. 28-9). A person becomes an heir to the promises made to Abraham, not by being the physical descendent of Abraham, but by being in the heir, in the seed, who has been previously identified (3:16) as Christ. The fact that the distinctions that he mentions no longer obtain, clearly indicates that the old covenant is no longer in force. The fullness of the time has come.
It would be foolish for any new covenant believer to desire to be subject to the Mosaic covenant. To do so would be to submit to a covenant that belonged to the old creation. It was a part of the old order that was characterized by weakness (Rom 8:3). The covenant given at Mt. Sinai was clearly inferior to the new covenant through which alone God intended to grant life and blessing to His people. It was a covenant that was never intended to last beyond the coming of the seed in whom the promises were made.
The time of fulfillment has come. The new covenant has been established. Why cling to the old?
20 It is true that the Mosaic law caused some individual sinners in Israel to despair of ever being put right with God through their own goodness and merit. Through this holy instrument, God taught them that their only hope was to account God to be faithful to His covenant promise made to Abraham and cast themselves on His mercy. Thus, they were justified through faith in God just as new covenant believers are. Our point here is that it is not this didactic function of the law for individuals that is central in Paul's mind at this point. He is not saying, "The law has become our individual teacher (didaskalos), but the law has become our national manager (paidagogos).
21 Randolph Yeager provides us with an example of this view in his comment on the words, "now that faith is come." He writes, "The aorist tells us that faith is now present, having come in the past. Thus verse 25 describes the Christian, whereas verse 24 describes him before he became a Christian (emphasis mine). Before faith came we were enslaved by the law, with the stern and holy demands with which we could not comply. That was the plight of the sinner in verse 23. But this discipline from the tutor was for a purpose. He was trying to teach us that we needed faith (emphasis mine), since our good works were not really good, when compared to God's law" (Yeager 1983,64).