The Pulpit Commentary — Galatians — Section 242

favours the helief that by "the Scripture" Hagar and Ishmael were driven forth beyond the apo8tle does not mean Scripture in the pale of God's most espeoial guardianship general (as ~.g. John x. 35), but the part.i- and blessing, the apostle hears the voioe of cular "pR,Ssago of Scripture" to which he is God bidding away from his ooven1mt all who referring (cf. John xix. 37; Acts i. 16). The disbelieved the gospel-all, the.t is who set animation of his tone is that of the trium- aside God's e.ssure.noos of his free u'umeriled phant IIS8ertion of the Almighty's will as love to all who believed in Jesus, It should an all-sufficing answer to all objections and seem that it was mainly for the purpose of all discouragements. For "the Scripture" introducing this denunciation that the apostle is equin,lent to "the utterance of God; " has been at the pains to trace out the alle- not merely as found in an inspired volume, goric,ll meaning of the narrative. The but because of the circumstances attending apostle is not now thinking of the natione.l upon the speaking of the words (comp. Rom. excisio1~ of !~e Jews; h~ is co~templating, ix. 17 ; eh. iii. S). They were, indeed, not nat10naht1es, but habits of mind-servile uttered by Sarah; being, however, not words legality on the one side, and on the other of a simply jealous and petulant woman, but faith e.cceptiug a free gift of grace. It is at of a. righteously indignant matron, whose their extreme peril, he in effect tells the just, if severe, requirement was enforced G11.latians, that they forsake the 111.tter to take upon the reluctant Abraham by God's own up with the former: God has shown that by express command. The historical faot itself, so doing they will forfeit the inheritance as thus recorded, was singularly noticeable, altogether. standing in a position marking it as pecu- Ver. 31.-In the Greek text of this verse, liarly significant: that it really was a type, taken in connection with the first of the next prophetical of a certain future spiritual pro- chapter, there is a great diversity ofreadiugs. cedure, is ascertained for us by the apostle's The following are the forms in which it is exposition. Cast out the bondwoman and presented by the principal editors :-(1) her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall Textus Receptus : • Apa., a.liell.tpol, ob,c lu1<•11 not be heir with the son of the freewoman ,ra,Blu1<71s T<1<11a, lvv\a ..-;;s ill.ev9,pas. Tji ,11.,.,. (l,cf3a>..• ..-¾,11 ,r,ulil<T1C71v ,ccil ..-011 vlo11 cilrrijs· ob 9,plq. oi'i11 if Xp1<TTbs ;,/Las i/71.iw9,p"'"'• <TT-i,ICE"TE, -yiip /L¾i Kll.71po1101<-ficrri [ or, 1<ll.71po110/L-f,<TE<] d vlos ,ccil /Lh .,,.cl>,..,, (v-y<; Boull.elas i11,xe,r6e. (2) L. T. T1Js T.cu5lulCT]r µ.E-rrJ. -roV vioV -r,js IA.etJ6Epas) ; Tr., Meyer, Revisers, W. and H. : i:uo, a.Bell.- cast oot tlui handmaid and luir son : for the q,ol, ol,,c Euµ.Ev 'ff'a.,B!trH1JS Tl1ev11., AAAIZ -rijs iAeu• son of the handmaid shall not inherit with tlui 9,pcis. Tfi h,,u9,plq. ;,/La.S Xp,u..-bs 71ll.Eu6,p(A)<TE, son of the freewomn,n. The Septuagint has <T"T-i,ICETE 0~11, /Ceil 1<¾/, ,,_.,._;,... (3) Ellicott: i:uo, "Cast ant this (ra.n-7111) handmaid and her son; a.Bell.tpol, obK E<1'/LE11 .....,Bl<T1£7/S TEIC11ct, a.71.>..a ..-;;s for the son of this (..-a,h11s) handmaid shall El\.Eu9,pcii-. Tii Ell.Ev9eplq. p ;,/Las Xpt<T"TOS 7171.Ev• not inherit with my son Isaac (1<•-rii ..-oi, viov 9,p.,u• u-r-l,1<e..-, 0J11, ""l ,c.-r.11.. (4) Lightfoot: /LO" 'Iucu/.1<);" the apostle's citation being lite- '110, o.Bell.tpol, ob,c /,rµ,11 ,rci1Blu1<71s -r<1<11a, o.71.71.ci rally exact, except that it has not the words ..-;;s l71.Ev9<pas ..-ji i11.,v6ip,4 p 1//Las Xp,,r.,-cls ..-at!-r11 11 and ..-ci6r71s (which are not in the 7111.EuO{po,u•· u-r-f,,c,.,-, o1iv, ,ccil 1<.T.71.. The follow- Hebrew), and substitutes "the son of the ing are the probable transfotions of these freewoman" for ''my son Isaac." His ob- sever11.l forms of the text :-(1) "Therefore, ject in these changes, which do not in the brethren, we are not 11, handmaid's children, least affect the substance, is to mark the but children of the freewomau : sto.nd fast utterance the more distinctly as God's own then in [or,' by ,'or,• to']thefreedom with which voice, speaking of the parties concerned, not Christ set us free; and do not again get held ae Sarah did, being one of them, but as in a yoke of bondage." (2) "Wherefore, supreme Rnler and Judge: for the Lord brethren, we are not a handmaid's child1·en, adopted her decision for his own. In respect but children of the free woman: with free- to lshmael's exclusion from inheriting, the dom did Christ set us free ; stand fast, then," instance of JephtLah (Judg. xL l, 2), ex- etc. (3) " Wherefore, brethren, we are not cluded in somewhat similar terms by the legi- a handmaid's children, but children of iho timate sons of his father (" Thou shalt not freewoman; in the freedom with which Christ inherit in the house of our father; for the son set us free stand fast, then, and," etc. (-l) of a harlot woman art thou"), does not apply. "Wherefore, brethren, we are not a hand- Ha~ar was nota"harlot;" but stood with maid's children, but children of the froe- respect to Sarah in much the same position woman by [i.e. 'by virtue of') tho freedom [or, as did Bilhah and Zilpah to Rachel and 'children of her who is free with that free- Leah. We cannot doubt but that the dis- dom'] with which Christ set us free; stand crimination made between the two sons, fast, then, and," eto. It will be seen by the whatever was the character of Sarah's feel- above that there appears e. general agree- ings in the matter, is to be ascribed to God's ment among recent editors of the Greek text own sovereign appointment (see Rom. ix. 7, upon three points: (1) they all substitute 11). l.n tw terrible sentence, by which 3,i, for lipci-an alteration which mukes no  Oil. IV, 1-31,J 'l'HE EPISTLE TO THE UALATIANS. 209