English: Map of the Letters of Galatia (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
In
the first entry in the Bible Junkies Online Commentary on Galatians, I
discussed introductory matters concerning the founding of the churches to the
Galatians, the situation when Paul wrote to them, when the letter might have
been written and the type of letters which Paul wrote, based on the common
Greco-Roman letters of his day. In
the second post, I considered the basic content and breakdown of a Pauline
letter. I noted the major sections of the formal letter structure and, in the
context of each section, outlined the theological and ethical (as well as
other) concerns of Paul, including some Greek words which will be examined more
fully as we continue with the commentary. In
the third entry, I looked at the salutation, which is long for Paul’s
corpus (only Romans 1:1-7 is longer) and briefly commented on the lack of a
Thanksgiving, the only letter of Paul’s which does not have one. The
fourth entry discussed the opening of the body of the letter, a significant
part of the letter especially in light of the absence of a Thanksgiving. In
the fifth entry, I examined the beginning of the opening of the body of the
letter, in which Paul describes his background in Judaism and I placed this in the
context of Judaism in the Hellenistic period. In the
sixth post in the online commentary, I continued to look at Paul’s
biographical sketch of his life, this concerning his earliest life as a
Christian. In
the seventh post, I examined what Paul says about his subsequent visit to
Jerusalem to see the apostles and the Church in Jerusalem.
In the eighth entry, Paul confronts Cephas about his hypocrisy in
Antioch.
The
ninth blog post started to examine the theological argument in one of
Paul’s most important and complex theological letters. In
the tenth entry, Paul makes an emotional appeal to the Galatians based on
their past religious experiences and their relationship with Paul. In
the eleventh chapter in the series, Paul began to examine Abraham in light
of his faith. The
twelfth blog post continued Paul’s examination of Abraham, but also claims
that Christ “redeemed” his followers from the “curse” of the Law. In
the thirteenth study in the Galatians online commentary, we looked at Paul’s
claim that God’s promises were to Abraham and his “offspring,” with a twist on
the meaning of “offspring.” The
fourteenth entry examined Paul’s question, in light of his claims about the
law, as to why God gave the law. The
fifteenth chapter in this commentary examines the function of the law,
while the
sixteenth post studied how the members of the Church are heirs to the
promise.
In
the seventeenth entry, I observed what it means to be an heir in Paul’s
theological scenario. And in the
eighteenth installment, Paul transitions back to his relationship with the
Galatians, but before he concentrates on this in full, he returns to the issue
of the stoicheia, commonly known as
the four cosmic powers, earth, air,
water and fire. In
the nineteenth blog post, Paul relies on his personal relations with the
Galatians to draw them to his point of view. In this, the twentieth entry, Paul
speaks of an allegory of Hagar and Sarah.
4. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians
d) Body of the Letter (1:13-6:10):
iv) Theological Teaching (2:15-5:12): Allegory
of Hagar and Sarah (4:21-5:1).
21 Tell me, you who
desire to be subject to the law, will you not listen to the law? 22 For it is
written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free
woman. 23 One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the
other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. 24 Now this
is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar,
from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in
Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in
slavery with her children. 26 But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem
above; she is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written, "Rejoice,
you childless one, you who bear no children, burst into song and shout, you who
endure no birth pangs; for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous
than the children of the one who is married." 28 Now you, my
friends, are children of the promise, like Isaac. 29 But just as
at that time the child who was born according to the flesh persecuted the child
who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the
scripture say? "Drive out the slave and her child; for the child of the
slave will not share the inheritance with the child of the free woman." 31
So then, friends, we are children, not of the slave but of the
free woman. 1 For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do
not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (NRSV)
The allegory of Hagar
and Sarah, which we examine here, reflects the theological issues underlying
the historical origins of the Church as well as any passage in Paul’s corpus. What
we are dealing with in the dispute between the Galatians and Paul is whether
Gentile followers of Jesus have to do the Torah in every respect, which would
certainly include the circumcision of sons. More than that, it underlies a
dispute among Jewish followers of Jesus, some of whom say that such observance by
Gentile followers of Jesus is essential and Paul, who says that it is not
necessary for their salvation or to be considered full members of the Church. The
nascent beginnings of a community set apart from Judaism might be said to emerge
in this passage, though the separation of the two communities is a complex
reality which played out over decades (some would argue centuries!) about which
scholars continue to debate. What we can say is that Paul creates an allegory
in which depending upon which side you fall in his understanding of “Hagar” and
“Sarah” will lead to much different views of Torah and Torah-observance; certainly,
this allegory would prompt different views among Jews, even groups of Jews who
both believed Jesus was the Messiah. Even if we understand that Paul remained a
Jew, loyal to the Torah, his allegory, in which the two sons of Abraham,
Ishmael, represented by his mother Hagar, equals slavery and the flesh, while
Isaac, represented by his mother Sarah, is freedom and Spirit (4:21-31), it is
hard to understand how ultimately those who believe the Torah ought still to be
followed, even by Gentiles, can accept this definition of the Law. Christ has
set us free, says Paul, so do not submit to a “yoke of slavery” (5:1), but this
means that the Law of Moses is a form of slavery in Paul’s mind, at least for
Gentile followers of Jesus.
For much of my discussion,
I will draw on Shaye J.D. Cohen’s remarks in the Jewish Annotated New Testament (JANT,
340-41). Cohen distinguishes between the
two-time use of “law” (nomos) in Galatians 4:21, stating that the
first instance (“tell me, you who desire to be subject to the law”) does not have
an article, while the second instance does (“will you not listen to the law?”).
He states that in Hebrew “The Torah” (ha-Torah) has a more limited sense, defining
the written Torah, than the use of Torah without an article, which reflects a broader
meaning among the rabbis, such as an inclusion of oral Torah. I do not think Paul
has in mind this distinction between written Torah and a broader sense of
Torah, but wants to make that point that those who follow the written Law must
follow all of the written Law. This is
especially the case since he moves immediately into a discussion of the passages
found in Genesis 16 and 21.
For Galatians
4:22-23, Paul gives a basic overview of the main players in the story, writing
that “Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free woman.
One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the other, the
child of the free woman, was born through the promise.” Paul next moves quickly to state that these
literal facts point in reality to “an allegory,” a type of interpretation in
which the literal characters and events signify things beyond their literal
meaning, generally something that has a deeper philosophical or theological
meaning. Allegory, in fact, though common in Christian interpretation
throughout history, began with Greek interpreters of Homer and was found in
Judaism prior to Christianity, with Cohen noting an allegory in Isaiah 5 (JANT, 341). A major Jewish proponent of allegorical
interpretation around the time of Paul was Philo of Alexandria, who read almost
the whole of the Hebrew Bible through the lens of allegory. What Paul is doing
here, then, is not unusual, for Greek or Jewish readers. What is unusual is
claiming that Hagar represents the Sinaitic covenant where God gave the Law to
Moses.
Paul writes, “now
this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is
Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai
in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with
her children. But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is
free, and she is our mother” (Galatians 4:24-26). To associate Hagar with the Law
of Moses is particularly challenging, especially based on the whole of the
story of Genesis, and, frankly, the whole of the Pentateuch, but we must
remember that Paul’s allegory is offered here as a particular Jewish reading,
not a Christian reading. What I mean is, whatever his interlocutors thought
about his allegorical interpretation, they would have accepted the form as a reasonable
way to read the Genesis text.
Cohen points out
that “this Pauline passage seems to be the earliest attestation of the idea
that a heavenly Jerusalem corresponds to an earthly one, the former built by
God, the latter built by humans…Paul understands the relationship between
earthly and heavenly Jerusalem to be not complementary but adversarial” (JANT, 341). Paul in fact has created
something unique in attributing the covenant at Sinai and the Temple at Jerusalem
to Hagar, who with Ishmael was cast out by Abraham at Sarah’s urging. When Ishmael
and Hagar are cast out, God promised Abraham, “Do not be distressed because of
the boy and because of your slave woman… As for the son of the slave woman, I
will make a nation of him also, because he is your offspring” (Genesis 21:12-13). But Hagar and Ishmael are certainly not the
descendants through whom the covenant with Abraham was said to be made. In Paul’s
allegory, the earthly Jerusalem and the Law, represented by Hagar, are a form
of slavery when contrasted with the heavenly Jerusalem and (one must suspect)
Jesus Christ, represented by Sarah, who is freedom.
Paul then cites without
explanation a passage from Isaiah 54:1, which offers a paean of praise to a “childless
one,” which must correspond to Sarah, whose
children “are more numerous than the children
of the one who is married” (Galatians 4:27). It is an odd passage here since it
is Sarah, not Hagar, who was married to Abraham, but Paul’s use of this verse
must point to his belief that Sarah’s children, at least spiritually, are (or
will be) more numerous than those of Hagar.
At this point, Paul
draws out the implications of his allegory stating that those who follow Jesus
are “children of the promise, like Isaac” (Galatians 4:28). Yet, Ishmael, “the
child who was born according to the flesh,” says Paul, “persecuted the child
who was born according to the Spirit” (Galatians 4:29). In fact, Genesis 21:9,
only says that “Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to
Abraham, playing with her son Isaac,” but Cohen notes that Paul has engaged
here in a kind of midrashic reading,
in which one extrapolates events from the biblical text (JANT, 341). Paul sees this kind of persecution at play in the Galatian
church, for he ends verse 29 saying of this persecution of Isaac by Ishmael, “so
it is now also.”
At the end of Paul’s
allegory, he draws on Genesis 21:10 to counsel the same behavior as carried out
by Abraham: “But what does the scripture say? ‘Drive out the slave and her
child; for the child of the slave will not share the inheritance with the child
of the free woman’” (Galatians 4:30). For Paul, it is the followers of Christ who “are
children, not of the slave but of the free woman. For freedom Christ has set us
free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Galatians
4:31-5:1). This is, finally, the result of Paul’s allegory: the Law functions
as an enslaving force for the Galatians and they need to let it go. Most Jews
in Paul’s day, of course, did not find the Torah enslaving and saw the image of
the “yoke” as affirming the commandments not an argument for casting them aside
(Cohen offers rabbinic texts in support of this claim: Mishnah Berakot, 2.2; Sifra
on Leviticus 11:43; and Babylonian Talmud
Berakot 14b; JANT, 341). Paul,
however, convinced that the truth resides with the freedom offered in Jesus Christ
for all people, not in the Law of Moses, proposes that the covenant was always
intended to be fulfilled by a people who represent the heavenly Jerusalem,
associated with Sarah, and not Hagar, associated with the earthly Jerusalem and
the Law.
It is, frankly, not strange
that most Jews of Paul’s day were not convinced by this allegory, since it
associates the covenant promises with slavery and reads Hagar as the ancestress
of the Law and the Temple. So, why then does Paul make such a claim? It really
goes back to his understanding that in the experience of Jesus Christ, the
truth has been revealed and anything that stands against this truth must be,
somehow, in opposition to it. Even if, though, Paul thought that Jews of his
own day, including him, should still follow the Torah – which I am not
convinced he did - it is difficult to see that the Law of Moses would continue
to be revered when his claims radically undermined its ongoing function for
many members of the Church. Still, Paul is not done with discussing the Law,
for as we will see in coming entries, it mattered to him, since it did indeed
come from God and somehow, someway, it still has a place for him among the
followers of Christ.
Next entry, Paul speaks against circumcision.
John W. Martens
I invite you to follow
me on Twitter @Biblejunkies
I encourage you to
“Like” Biblejunkies on Facebook.
This entry is cross-posted at America Magazine The Good Word
0 comments:
Post a Comment