Review

Sometimes, Paul seems to write the same things repeatedly but with different emphases and angles!  What, we may say, is he saying here and why?  While we ask our questions, Paul is completely focussed on teaching the Gospel.  His problems were that his message was open to much misunderstanding, and most of his letters were written to address one of these misunderstandings.  Yet crucially, he never wavers from repeatedly affirming the truth of the Gospel.  He repeats this in as many different ways as it takes to counter false religion. Salvation is to be found by faith in Jesus Christ alone.

Getting to grips with the passage

If we are to understand this passage, then we must return to the mindset of Paul’s opponents.  Paul has just argued that the faith of Abraham comes historically before the giving of the law to Moses and therefore takes precedent over it as a means of ‘righteousness’ and access to God (3:10-14). But Judaisers would have quickly replied ‘that may be so, but God’s revelation to Moses comes after Abraham, so the law now covers everything, including the Covenant with Abraham.’

Paul was having no more of this than anything else the Judaisers said, and if we spot this we will understand what Paul says here and why.  This passage is not one that that is much preached upon, largely because it speaks of legalism and is hard to understand.  But if we stick to it and try to follow what Paul says as it unravels, we will then gain the benefit of some of his more interesting and relevant comments along the way.  

The will and the promise

To begin with, Paul begins by addressing the issue of whether God’s will in the Old Testament is fixed.  In other words, has Paul got the right to argue that Abraham’s faith is more important than his circumcision, or more important than the laws given to Moses, later on?  Jews would argue that he could not do this; Paul is obviously saying he thinks he can.

He likens the promises of God in the Old Testament to something like a will (3:15), which is a legal document.  Interestingly, the word he uses for a ‘will’ is the same Greek word used for ‘covenant’.  It broadly means ‘a legal agreement’ of some kind, but in this instance, Paul is clearly talking about a will and the point at which it is ratified.

Now as we all know, a will can be changed as many times as the person who has made it wants, until the point in time comes when this person dies.  At this time, the will is fixed and must be adhered to as a legal document.  

Descendant(s) of Abraham

No we enter awkward territory.  In verse 16, Paul argues that the legal promises of God, the covenant, was made not with Israel in general, but with one ‘descendant’.  We can spot where Paul is going; he is going to say that this descendant is Jesus (3:16).  But what is going on here?  If we read the passage in Genesis 12:7 or 22:17-18 from which Paul quotes, the Hebrew word used is ‘seed’ which is a collective singular, as it is in English.  Strictly, it can mean either one ‘seed’ or lots of ‘seed’!  Yet Paul insists that the word is exclusively singular!

I think it likely that Paul is saying to his opponents, who are intelligent people, they have forgotten that God’s ‘seed’ can mean a single person, not just Israel in general.  Abraham of course had but one son by his wife Sarah, Isaac, and Israelite history is full of hope in one man, the anointed one or ‘Messiah’, who will fulfil God’s promises uniquely and by Himself.

Paul is appealing to Christian influenced by Judaisers to return to belief in Christ as the unique son of God in whom all His promises are fulfilled.  His point is that God’s promises are set at the time of Christ’s death, not before.  For Paul, all that happened in the Old Testament can be re-interpreted; it happened before the ‘will’ was fixed by Christ’s death!

The covenant promise

Again, it is very hard to get to grips with the next part of what Paul says.  Verses 17 and 18 only inspire one who is digging into Scripture’s text to search it for all its worth, it will never inspire the seeker after purple passages!  Read carefully, you will find Paul is saying that God’s promises, meaning the promise of salvation, are set forth in the covenant made with Abraham.  So the law which came 430 years later (following the chronology of Exodus 12:40) has absolutely nothing to do either with the promise of salvation or its ratification.  The law is something completely different; it is nothing to do with any means of salvation.  It is a point he had to drum home!

The law, angels and mediators!

Again, we will be surprised by the next paragraph!  Paul speaks here of the giving of the law, and his point is straightforward.  having established that the law comes later than the covenant promise of salvation, he says that it was given because people rebelled against God and needed the measure of God’s moral will.  What surprises us, however, is the way Paul speaks of the giving of the law; he says that it was ‘arranged by angels and through a mediator’ (3:19).  What can this mean?

In Paul’s day, it was believed that it was not God who met with Moses at the burning bush and Mount Sinai, but angels.  Israelites believed that no one could see God and still live, so Moses must have seen and angel (a sentiment found in a number of places in Scripture – Ex 33:20 etc.), and they believed Abraham met God through angelic visitors (Gen 18:1f.) centuries before.  All this meant that the law was regarded as having been given by God to angels, by angels to Moses, and by Moses to the people.  It was a process of mediation, and Moses could be called a ‘mediator’ just as the others!

Paul is not impressed by this array of presumption.  In a simple phrase he dismisses it all; ‘God is one’ (3:20).

Where does the law stand alongside the promises of God?

The last two verses of this passage take a different turn, and Paul attempts to put the laws of Judaism in their proper place.  He has already stated that they are given for moral guidance (3:19), but he now goes further.  First, he says categorically that the law is a part of God’s revelation; he will not hear of people dismissing the law as irrelevant (3:21).  However, it cannot save people and has no power to give life (3:21,22), moreover all scripture, God’s revealed Word, is similar; it shows us what we need but does not of itself save people.

The only means of salvation, and at this point we must regard this as an emphatic point, quite simply the only means, is that found through faith in Jesus Christ (3:22).  In Him what was ‘promised’ is ‘given’ (3:22), and only those who ‘believe’ are able to access the things of God.  We may feel that this has been a tortuous pathway but Paul has had to pick his way through this minefield to affirm the Gospel.  He will do anything to make sure the Gospel is proclaimed!

15 Friends, I give you a worldly example: once someone’s will has been endorsed, no one can add to it or cancel it. 16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his descendant; it does not say ‘to his descendants’ as referring to many of them; it says ‘to your descendant’ referring to one person, who is Christ.

17 This is what I mean: the law, introduced four hundred and thirty years later, cannot cancel a covenant promise previously endorsed by God, as if to do away with this promise. 18 If the inheritance originated from the law then it would have nothing to do with the promise; but God granted the inheritance to Abraham through the promise!

19 What then is the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions, arranged by angels and through a mediator, until the descendant would come to whom the promise had been made. 20 Now a mediator represents more than one party; but God is one.

21 So, is the law opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not!  If a law had been given which had the power to give life, then righteousness would indeed originate in the law, 22 but scriptures have kept everything under the power of sin, so that through faith in Jesus Christ, what was promised might be given to those who believe!