Commentary on Galatians 3.3–3.5

Through these words he also shows another great point. Since they were troubled that the law was older and faith came after the law, he removes this suspicion of theirs as well, showing that faith is older than the law; and this is clear from Abraham, for he was justified before the law appeared. He also shows that what is happening now has happened according to prophecy: "For the Scripture, foreseeing," he says, "that God would justify the Gentiles by faith" (not by the law), "preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham." What does this mean? "He who gave the law," he says, "had determined, even before he gave this law, that the Gentiles should be justified by faith." And he did not say "revealed," but "preached the gospel beforehand," so that you may learn that the patriarch too rejoiced in this way of righteousness and longed greatly for it to come to pass. And since another fear also held them (for it was written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of this law, to do them"), he dissolves this fear too, wisely and intelligently turning it round to the opposite, and showing that those who have left the law are not only not cursed but blessed, while those who hold to it are not only not blessed but cursed. Those men said that one who does not keep the law is cursed; but he shows that one who keeps it is cursed, and one who does not keep it is blessed. Again, they said that one who gives heed to faith alone is cursed; but he shows that one who gives heed to faith alone is blessed. How, then, does he show all this? … For it is no ordinary thing we have promised; therefore we must attend with exactness to what follows. He showed it already, when he said earlier that Scripture said to the patriarch, "In you shall all the nations be blessed." At that time there was no law, but faith; therefore, drawing the conclusion, … "with faithful Abraham." But so that they might not take this as an objection and say, "Naturally he was justified by faith, for there was not yet a law; but show us faith justifying after the law was given," he comes to this point and shows more than they ask: not only that faith justifies, but that the law makes those who rely on it accursed. And to learn this, hear the apostle's own words: "For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse." But this is an assertion that does not yet have its proof. What, then, is the proof? From the law itself: "For cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of this law, to do them." That no one is justified by the law is plain to everyone; for all have sinned and are under a curse. But he does not say it so, lest he seem to be pronouncing it himself; again he establishes it by a testimony that contains both points in brief: that no one fulfilled the law (which is why they were accursed), and that faith justifies. What is the testimony? From the prophet Habakkuk, who says, "The righteous shall live by faith." This shows not only righteousness by faith but also that it is not possible to be saved through the law. "For since no one kept the law," he says, "but all were under the curse because of transgression, an easy way was devised, the way of faith"; which is also the greatest sign that no one could be justified by the law. For the prophet did not say, "The righteous shall live by the law," but "by faith." "But the law is not of faith; rather, the one who does them shall live by them." "For the law," he says, "seeks not faith only but also works; but grace saves and justifies by faith." Do you see how he showed that those who give heed to the law came under a curse, because it is impossible to fulfill it? And how faith has this power of justifying? For he had promised these things earlier, and he established them with great force. Since the law was too weak to bring man to righteousness, faith was found as no small remedy, making what was impossible for the law possible through itself. If, then, Scripture too says, "The righteous shall live by faith," despairing of salvation through the law, and Abraham was justified by faith, it is clear that the power of faith is great. "That one who does not abide in the law is cursed, and one who gives heed to faith is righteous, is clear," someone says; "but how can you prove to us that that curse no longer stands? For Abraham lived before the law; but we, having once come under the yoke of slavery, made ourselves liable to the curse. Who, then, has loosed that curse?" See how quickly he meets this. What has been said is indeed sufficient: for how could one who has once been justified, and has died to the law, and has entered upon a new life, be liable to the curse? Yet he is not content with this, but contends in another way as well, writing: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree." And yet the people was liable to another curse, the one that says, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by the things written in the book of the law." And what of this? The people was liable to it, for they did not abide by them, nor was there anyone who had fulfilled the whole law. But Christ exchanged this curse for another, the one that says, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree." Since, then, both the one who hangs on a tree is cursed and the one who transgresses the law, and the one who was to loose that curse must not himself become liable to it, yet must receive a curse in its place, he received such a curse, and through it loosed the other. And just as when someone has been condemned to die, another who is not liable, choosing to die in his place, snatches him from the punishment, so Christ too did. For since he was not subject to the curse of transgression, Christ took this curse upon himself in place of that one, in order to loose theirs; "for he committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth." [4] As, then, by dying he rescued from death those who were going to die, so by receiving a curse he freed them from the curse. "So that the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles." How to the Gentiles? "In your seed," it says, "shall all the nations be blessed," that is, in Christ. If this had been said of the Jews, how could it make sense that those who were liable to the curse because of their transgression should become the cause of blessing to others? For none of the accursed gives another a share in a blessing of which he himself has been deprived. Hence it is clear that the whole is said of Christ; for he was the seed of Abraham, and through him the nations have been blessed; and so the promise of the Spirit comes as well. He himself shows this, saying, "So that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." For since it was not possible for the grace of the Spirit to come to one who was ungrateful and had given offense, they are first blessed, the curse having been removed; then, justified through faith, they draw down the grace of the Spirit. So the cross loosed the curse, faith brought in righteousness, and righteousness drew down the grace of the Spirit. "Brothers, I speak in human terms: even a man's covenant, once ratified, no one annuls or adds to it …" … from human examples. For since he had established his argument from the Scriptures, from the miracles that took place among them, from what Christ suffered, and from the patriarch, he now goes on to common usage too. For it is always his habit to do this, so as to sweeten his discourse and make it more acceptable to his hearers. So too in speaking to the Corinthians he says, "Who tends a flock and does not eat of its milk? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit?" And again to the Hebrews: "For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive." And in many places one may find him dwelling on such reasonings. For God too in the Old Testament does this continually, saying, "Can a woman forget her child?" and again, "Shall the clay say to the potter, What are you doing?" And in Hosea he takes the part of a husband despised by his wife. And in the types too one can see much use of human examples, as when the prophet takes the loincloth, and goes down to the potter's house. What, then, does his example mean? That faith was older, and the law more recent and temporary, and given for this reason, to prepare the way for faith. That is why he says, "Brothers, I speak in human terms." Having called them foolish above, here he calls them brothers, at once rebuking and consoling them. "Even a man's ratified covenant." "If a man makes a will," he says, "does anyone dare to come afterward and overturn it, or add something to it?" For this is the meaning of "or adds to it." "Much more, then, in the case of God." And with whom did God make the covenant? "The promises were spoken to Abraham," he says, "and to his seed. It does not say, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, And to your seed, who is Christ. This I say: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God in Christ, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise." "Look, then: God too made a covenant with Abraham, saying of the nations that they would have the blessings in his seed; how, then, can the law overturn them?" But since the example could not wholly carry the mind up to the matter in hand, he therefore said first, "I speak in human terms": "Take nothing from the example as applying to the majesty of God." But consider the example from the beginning. He promised Abraham that through his seed the nations would be blessed; and his seed according to the flesh is Christ. The law came four hundred and thirty years later. If, then, the law grants the blessings and life and righteousness, that promise is void. Then no one annuls a man's covenant, but God's covenant is annulled after four hundred and thirty years? For if what that covenant promised is given not by it but by something else in its place, it has been cast out. And how could this make sense? "Why, then," he says, "the law? It was added because of transgressions." For this too is not superfluous. Do you see how he looks all around, how he uses countless eyes? For since he had exalted faith and shown it to be older, so that no one might think the law superfluous, he sets this part right too, showing that it was given not in vain but very usefully: "because of transgressions," that is, so that the Jews might not live without fear and slip into the extremity of wickedness, but the law might lie upon them like a bridle, training, regulating, preventing them from transgressing, if not all the commandments, at least some one of them. So the gain from the law is not small. But until when? "Until the seed should come to whom the promise had been made," speaking of Christ. If, then, it was given until the coming of Christ, why do you drag it further and out of season? "Ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator." He either calls the priests angels, or says that the angels themselves served in the giving of the law. By "mediator" he here means Christ, showing that he existed before and himself gave the law. "Now a mediator is not of one, but God is one."

What would the heretics say here? For if "the only true" does not allow the Son to be true God, then neither does this allow him to be God at all, because it is said, "But God is one." But if, though the Father is called the one God, the Son too is God, it is plain that, though the Father is called true, the Son too is true. "A mediator," he says, "is a mediator between two." Of whom, then, was Christ the mediator? Plainly of God and men. Do you see how he shows that it was he who gave the law? If, then, he gave it, he would have authority to annul it too. "Is the law, then, against the promises of God?" For if the blessings were given in the seed of Abraham, and the law brings in a curse, then it is against the promises of God. How, then, does he resolve the objection? First he denies it, saying, "God forbid"; then he establishes his point, saying: "For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law." What he means is this: "If we had the hope of life in it, and it held the power of our salvation, perhaps you would be right to say this; but if it is faith that saves, then even if the law makes men accursed, you have suffered no harm, since faith comes and looses everything. For if you were to fall from faith because of the law, you would fall indeed; but if the law was given for this purpose, to shut up all, that is, to convict them and show them their own offenses, it not only does not hinder you from obtaining the promise, but even helps you to obtain it." Showing this, he said: "But the Scripture shut up all things under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe." For since the Jews did not even perceive their own sins, and those who did not perceive them did not even desire forgiveness, he gave the law to convict their wounds, so that they might long for the physician. For "shut up" means that, having convicted them, it held them in fear. Do you see that it is not only not against the promises of God, but was even given on behalf of the promises? If the law had been championing its own cause and authority, this would rightly be said; but if it runs for another and did everything for his sake, how is it against the promises of God? For if the law had not been given, all would have run aground in wickedness, and none of the Jews would have been ready to listen to Christ. But having been given, it achieved two things: it trained them in a measured virtue, and persuaded them to know their own sins, which above all made them more eager to seek the Son. Those, at any rate, who did not believe in him did not believe because they had not condemned their own sins. Showing this, he said: "For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to the righteousness of God." "Now before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, shut up for the faith that was to be revealed." Do you see how clearly he has set out what we said? For "we were kept under guard" and "shut up" show nothing else than the security that came from the commandments of the law: … and the law, by the way of life it prescribed, kept them safe for faith. "So the law has become our tutor to Christ, so that we might be justified by faith." But the tutor does not oppose the teacher; he even works with him, freeing the young man from all wickedness and preparing him to receive the lessons from the teacher in full leisure; but when the boy is formed, the tutor then departs. That is why he says: "But now that faith has come" (faith that leads to the perfect man), "we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." If, then, the law is a tutor, and we were kept under guard under it, shut up, it is not opposed to grace but its fellow worker; but if, after grace has come, it goes on holding us, then it is opposed. For if it shuts in those who ought to go out to grace, then it ruins our salvation. Just as a lamp that gave light in the night, if, when day has come, it should compel us not to look at the sun, has not only done us no favor but has done us harm, so too the law, if it becomes a hindrance to greater things. So those who keep it now are the ones who most discredit it. For the tutor too makes the young man ridiculous when, though the time calls on him to leave, he keeps him by his side. That is why Paul says, "But now that faith has come, you are no longer under a tutor." So we are no longer under a tutor. "For you are all sons of God." Oh, how great is the power of faith, and how he reveals it as he goes on! Earlier he showed that it made them sons of the patriarch: "For know," he says, "that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham"; but now he declares that they are sons of God too: "For you are all sons of God," he says, "through faith in Christ Jesus": through faith, not through the law. Then, since he had said something great and wonderful, he tells the manner of the adoption too: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." And why did he not say, "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ were born of God"? For that was what followed from showing them to be sons. Because he puts it in a much more awesome way. For if Christ is the Son of God, and you have put him on, having the Son in yourself and having been made like him, you have been brought into one kinship and one form. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Do you see an insatiable soul? Having said that we have become sons of God through faith, he does not stop there, but seeks to find something more that can set forth more clearly our closer union with Christ. And having said, "You have put him on," he is not content even with this expression, but explaining it he goes further into such union, and says, "You are all one in Christ Jesus"; that is, you all have one form, one stamp, the stamp of Christ. What could be more awesome than these words? He who was formerly a Greek, a Jew, a slave, goes about bearing the form not of an angel or an archangel, but of the Master of all himself, and displaying Christ in himself. "And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise." Do you see how he has now proved what he said earlier about the seed, that the blessings were given to Abraham and to his seed?