The Abrahamic Covenant
Part 9
The Bond-woman and
the Free-woman
John Plunkett
May 23, 2015
Last
time in Part 8, we covered a lot of ground.
In order to pull things together, to catch up and to summarize “the
story so far,” we did a lot of recapping of scriptures that we’d covered in
more detail in earlier episodes. But
today, we’ll move on!
Our
next New Testament “covenant” scriptures are in the third and fourth chapters
of Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, where we’ll be spending most of our time
today.
But
let’s ask the same question again that we’ve asked so frequently throughout
this series: which covenant – or covenants
(plural) – are these scriptures referring to?
Galatians
3:
6: Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for
righteousness.
7: Know you therefore that they which
are of faith, the same are the
children of Abraham.
8: And the scripture, foreseeing that God
would justify the heathen {NKJV: gentiles}
through faith, preached before the
gospel unto Abraham, saying, “In you
shall all nations be blessed.”
One
of the amazing things about these covenant scriptures is that they bring out to
us the fact that the gospel was being preached all of the way back in Abraham’s
time. Yes, God gave the gospel to
Abraham. That is astonishing!
The
Greek word in verse 8 for ‘justify’ is
“dikaioo.” It means to make just, make righteous,
or to make free. And that very same freedom will come up later in today’s sermon.
This
dovetails so perfectly with all that we read recently in the Romans 11
“grafting” scriptures; and like them, this is so obviously referring to the Abrahamic Covenant – and specifically
the “grace” part of it, which, as we all know by now, is one and the same as
the New Covenant.
Paul
mentions “the scripture” here in
verse 8.
Which scripture is he quoting from?
Where did God say these words to Abraham? Actually, there are at least three scriptures
where God mentions these things:
Genesis
12:3:
And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you: and in you
shall all families of the earth be
blessed.
Genesis
18:18:
Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be
blessed in him?
Genesis
22:18:
And in your seed shall all the nations of
the earth be blessed; because you have obeyed my voice.
Over
and over again, God drove this point home to Abraham, when it must have seemed
so impossible that this was going to happen.
Back to Galatians 3, and continuing in verse 9:
9: So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
10: For as many as are of the works of the law {i.e. the law of the Sinai Covenant} are under the curse: for it is written, “Cursed is every one that continues not in all things which are written in the book of the law {the Sinai Covenant law} to do them”…
What
is “the book of the Law” where this is written?
It is found in Deuteronomy 27, which is referring to the Sinai covenant and its laws:
Deuteronomy
27:26:
Cursed be he that confirms not all
the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, “Amen.”
But
the people did not “do them.” The people did not “do” the law. They did not fulfil what they had promised to do;
and so, as a result, they were under this curse.
I
searched around in the Old Testament to see if there was a record of them
saying “Amen,” as God repeatedly commanded them here in this chapter. I couldn’t find any record of them doing
so. You can go through this chapter and
read how many times the LORD commanded, “And the people shall say “Amen.” But
when you come to the end of the account, the people did not say “Amen.”
Back
to Galatians 3:
11:
But that no man is justified {the Greek word “dikaioo” again} by the law {the Sinai
Covenant law} in the sight of God, it is evident: for,
the just {this similar Greek word “dikaios” means “righteous”} shall live by faith.
Yes,
by faith – just like Abraham!
12: And the {Sinai
Covenant} law is not
of faith: but, the man that does them
{does the Sinai laws} shall live in
them…
In other words, if any man wants to stay with
the Sinai Covenant and its laws, he is bound
by his vow to continue keeping them.
13: Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the {Sinai} law, being made a curse for us: for it is written {in Deuteronomy 21:23},
“Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree”:
14a: that the
blessing of Abraham might come on
the Gentiles through Jesus Christ…
Yes! Through Jesus Christ’s New Covenant – which is one and the same as the “grace” part of the
Abrahamic Covenant – those spiritual blessings were opened up to the Gentiles.
How
does this happen?
It is made possible by Jesus who took the curse on Himself by voluntarily
agreeing to be hanged on a tree.
14b:
…that we might receive the promise of the
Spirit through faith…
Through
faith! By the terms of the New Covenant and the grace
part of the Abrahamic Covenant! Not
through the keeping of the works of the laws of the Sinai Covenant.
15: Brethren, I speak after the manner of men;
though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannuls, or adds
thereto…
The
old King James English is not very clear here; but what Paul is, in effect,
saying here is that: “Even a covenant between two mere human beings, once it
has been confirmed, signed, sealed and delivered, is irrevocably bound and
unchangeable. If this is the case with a
confirmed human-to-human covenant, how much more irrevocable is a confirmed
covenant between the Eternal God and men?”
16: Now to Abraham
and his seed were the promises
made. He said not “and to seeds,” as of
many; but as of one, “and to your seed,”
which is Christ.
We
need to keep this in mind: the fact that Jesus Christ is the very centre of these covenants. Imagine a little seed and how small it is;
but how very much is contained in that seed.
17: And this I say, that the covenant {the Abrahamic Covenant}, that was confirmed before {previously; in
the past} of God in Christ,
the law {of the Sinai Covenant},
which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should
make the promise {of the Abrahamic Covenant} of none effect.
This
is amazing because it is telling us that Jesus Christ was right there with
Abraham.
18: For if the inheritance be of the law {of
the Sinai covenant… which it isn’t!}, it
is no more of promise: but God gave
it to Abraham by promise…
Not by the law! Not
by the Sinai covenant! He gave it to
Abraham “by promise.” And He gave that
promise through Jesus Christ who was right there with Abraham!
So,
through the apostle Paul, God is telling us here that He is actually elevating the importance of the
eternally-binding grace part of the Abrahamic Covenant. He is solidifying
it and He is making it permanent. Rock solid! At the same time, He is lowering the importance of the temporary
Sinai Covenant along with its works of the sacrificial law. The Sinai Covenant was temporary; but the
Abrahamic Covenant and the New Covenant are eternal.
We
could continue on with much more detail in the remaining verses of this
chapter; but for now, let’s just finish the chapter off with a reading of
verses 26 to 29, which are most relevant to what we were talking about in Parts
7 and 8 of this study series – access to the Abrahamic Covenant by Gentiles:
26: For you are all the children of God by faith
{Abraham-like!} in Christ Jesus.
Again,
we have to remember who these people were that Paul was writing to. Many of these Galatians were Gentiles.
27: For as many of you as have been baptized into
Christ have put on Christ.
28: There is neither Jew {Israelite} nor
Greek {Gentile}, there is
neither bond nor free there is
neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
29: And if you be Christ’s, then are you
Abraham’s seed, and heirs according
to the promise.
There
is an inheritance for us all, whether we are Israelites, Abrahamites, or
Gentiles.
As
we move on into chapter 4, please keep those “bond nor free” and “male
nor female” phrases in mind, because
we’re about to examine the amazing account of the symbolism of two very famous females – one who was a bond-woman and one who was a free-woman. We are going to examine their incredible
symbolism here.
Galatians
4:
21: Tell me, you that desire to be under
the Law {specifically the sacrificial laws of the Sinai
Covenant}, do you not hear the law?
22: For it is written, that Abraham had two sons,
the one {Ishmael} by a bond-maid
{the Egyptian servant-girl, Hagar}, the other {Isaac} by a
free-woman {Abraham’s lawful wife, Sarah}.
23: But he {Ishmael} who
was of the bond-woman was born after
the flesh {Greek “sarx” which can mean “the sensuous nature of
man”}; but he {Isaac} of the free-woman
was by promise…
Other
than Abraham being very elderly at the time, there was no real miracle in the conception of Ishmael.
Even
in our day, elderly men have been known to sire children – usually by young
women. Also, in the time of the
patriarchs, life-spans were longer and the onset of the aging process did not
come as early as it does in our day.
Like other elderly patriarchs, Abraham was at this time still what we
can call “able” in this respect.
Even
after Sarah’s death, Abraham remarried and sired six more sons! Perhaps there something good in their water
back then! Also, Ishmael’s mother,
Hagar, was not aged or barren.
But
Sarah was both aged and barren! So Isaac’s conception and birth were “by promise” – true miracles –
direct results of God’s repeated advance promises
as well as His direct intervention when the time came.
As
we continue in this chapter, please remember that Peter wrote that some of
Paul’s writings in his epistles can sometimes be hard for his readers to
understand (II Peter 3:15-16).
This
is the first time I can remember ever having seen the use of a “treble
symbolism” in scripture.
What
we see here is:
-
A symbolizes B,
- B symbolizes C,
- C symbolizes D.
Let’s
repeat verses 22 and 23, just to get the flow:
22: For it is written, that Abraham had two sons,
the one {Ishmael} by a bond-maid {Hagar}, the other {Isaac} by a free-woman {Sarah}.
23: But he {Ishmael} who was of the bond-woman was born after the flesh;
but he {Isaac} of the free-woman was by promise…
24: which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which genders to bondage, which is Hagar…
So,
these two women begin this allegory of the two covenants – beginning with “the
one from Mount Sinai, which genders to bondage, which is Hagar.”
Which are “the two covenants” mentioned here?
As we shall see as we go through this, they are the Sinai Covenant and the Abrahamic
Covenant – specifically its grace part
– which is the same as the New
Covenant.
What
is an allegory? My dictionary tells me that it is a symbol, a parable or a metaphor. So Paul is clearly telling us here that he is
mentioning Hagar, Ishmael, Sarah and Isaac symbolically. He is doing so to make a very important
point.
In
the past, some have interpreted this the wrong way, thereby leading brethren
astray by their false conclusions.
Still, we know that Jesus did use parables to hide His pearls of wisdom
and truth from those who His Father was not calling at the time. So maybe Paul was following his Master’s lead
here in a similar way. But, we have been
called and we have been given God’s Spirit and understanding.
So
what is God, through the apostle Paul, saying here? He
is putting two covenants on the table
for discussion.
The
first covenant is the Sinai Covenant,
symbolized by Hagar. Through Paul, God says that it “genders
to bondage.” When we are talking about Hagar and bondage in the same breath, it is good to remember that she was Egyptian, and also that she was a slave!
But
what does the phrase “genders to bondage”
mean?
The
English word “genders” is translated
from the Greek verb “gennao” (Strong’s
1080) and is alternately translated in the King James Version as: beget, be born, bear, bring forth and be delivered. It is talking about the birth process.
The
word “bondage” is translated from the
Greek noun douleia (Strong’s 1397)
and it means just what it says – bondage or slavery.
So,
“genders to bondage” can mean:
-
Begotten or born to (or into)
slavery,
- Begotten or born for the purpose of
slavery.
We
are talking about Hagar here and the symbolism. The double symbolism is this:
i) Mount Sinai,
ii) The Sinai Covenant,
iii) The sacrificial laws that were given
at Mount Sinai which, in turn, symbolize bondage or slavery – specifically
slavery to that complex system of sacrificial laws.
That’s
the double symbolism. Now comes the third:
25: For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and
answers to Jerusalem which now is,
and is in bondage with her children.
Physically,
geographically and nationally, this is a huge
leap! The mountain that is generally
believed to be Mount Sinai is located on the Sinai Peninsula and is presently
in the land of Egypt – not in the
main peninsula of Saudi Arabia. The
distance from Mount Sinai to Jerusalem in the modern state of Israel is
approximately 500 kilometers (about 300 miles).
In
Paul’s allegory, Mount Sinai, its covenant and its laws in turn symbolize the
city of “Jerusalem which now is,” i.e. the physical,
earthly Jerusalem of Paul’s day
which, as Paul tells us here, was, at
that time, in bondage, along with all of her children.
In
bondage to what?
Twenty-odd
years previously, some Jews untruthfully insisted to Jesus that, because the
Jews were Abraham’s seed, they had never
been in bondage to any man (John
8:31-37).
These
Jews were delusional! Of course, in
reality, they were in bondage! And had
been on more than one occasion:
1.
Despite
being children of Abraham, their Israelite forefathers had spent four
hundred-odd years in captivity to the Egyptians.
2.
Virtually
the whole house of Judah had spent seventy long years in bondage to the
Babylonians.
3.
Their
brethren of the House of Israel had been taken into captivity by Assyria; and
the vast majority had never returned to the Promised Land. And still haven’t to this day!
4.
Even
at the very time that these Jews made these false claims, their country was under
the boot of Rome.
5.
Their
own puppet kings – the Herods – were gentiles! They were Idumaeans of Nabatean Arab and
Edomite (Esauite) descent.
So
yes, those Jews were in physical,
national bondage; but was there perhaps another kind of bondage that Paul might
have been referring to here?
Yes. At the time Paul wrote this letter to the
Galatian church brethren, the Jerusalem temple and the Aaronic priesthood were
still in existence; and the Sinai Covenant sacrificial laws were still being
practiced.
For
thirty-nine (or perhaps forty) years after the death and resurrection of Jesus
took away the necessity of that bondage, the Jews were still slaves to the system of the sacrificial laws of the temporary
Sinai Covenant – sacrificial laws which could not forgive sin. (Hebrews
10:11).
Thinking
way back in time, the Israelites had originally – as Jacob and his sons –
entered Egypt as a free people; but they were later enslaved. Then God came along and freed them at the
time of the exodus. And during that period of freedom, God offered them His
temporary Sinai Covenant along with its sacrificial system. They accepted that package; but it was a
temporary covenant and sacrificial system which was supposed to have terminated
at the time of Jesus’ death and resurrection.
But the Jews and Levites continued it for another forty years until God
came along and allowed the temple to be destroyed along with all its
furnishings and rites. During that forty
years, those Jews and Levites, in effect, enslaved themselves again. Yes, in the sense of religious practice, they
became enslaved again; but they actually did it to themselves, virtually by
choice, because they rejected Jesus as their Messiah.
So,
although those sacrifices could not take away their sins, many of those
“children of the earthly Jerusalem” venerated their physical city, they
venerated the physical Temple, they venerated the priesthood, and they
venerated the sacrificial rituals; plus many more rituals as well – traditions
that they had invented and added themselves in blatant disobedience to God’s
Word (Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32). This was
tantamount to idolatry.
Despite
their idolatrous veneration of the physical temple, its priesthood and its
rituals (which would soon – in 70 AD – come crashing down around their ears –
literally!), their many misdeeds show us that many of those “children of that
earthly Jerusalem” were still in
bondage to sin; and to its penalty – death!
How? Why?
Two reasons:
1.
Because
the Jews and Levites strove to hang onto and maintain the Sinai Covenant – the one we might correctly refer to as “the Hagar Covenant” – a covenant which, at
the time of the writing of these epistles to the Galatians and Hebrews, was
decaying, waxing old, and was ready to vanish away (Hebrews 8:13). It should
have vanished away already; but the Jews hung on to it for dear life. In another twenty years or so after the
writing of these epistles, it would
vanish away.
2.
Because
all but a few of these “children of the earthly Jerusalem” rejected the
“Singular Seed” of the New Covenant –
the central figure of the Grace part
of the Abrahamic Covenant – the One
whose sacrifice could forgive
sin. All of those millions of sacrifices
under the Sinai Covenant – sacrifices which could not forgive sin – pictured and pointed to Him and His sacrifice
which could forgive sin. But they rejected Him and His sacrifice.
In
addition to these two factors, some Jews (or Judaizers who may not have been
actual Jews) were trying to foist the continuation of the terms of the Sinai
Covenant on the fledgling Christian church as a necessity – trying to tell them
that it was mandatory for them to keep those sacrificial laws.
In
ten scriptures, Jerusalem is called “the Holy City” and there is one where it
is called “the beloved city.” in In
Matthew 23:37, Jesus revealed that He had a special place in His heart for
Jerusalem and its children. But in that
very same verse, He referred to the city of Jerusalem (earthly Jerusalem) as
the city whose children killed His prophets and stoned those who were sent to
them. So even though He loved those
people, He was not too happy with them or the choices they were making.
There
are many other scriptures, as well as items in profane history, that show us
that this earthly Jerusalem and its
children, which the apostle Paul mentions here in Galatians 4:25 remained
steeped in sin. They still are!
We
have discussed the symbolism of Hagar.
Now we move on into the second symbolism: the one of Sarah:
Galatians
4:26:
But Jerusalem which is above {i.e. the heavenly Jerusalem} is free,
which is the mother of us all.
This
“Jerusalem which is above” refers to the second of the two covenants mentioned in
verse 24, and to the second set of symbolisms which refer to it.
Whereas
Hagar and the earthly Jerusalem symbolize the Sinai Covenant and its bondage, “the mother of us all” – i.e. Sarah
who, as we have seen, was an integral part of the Abrahamic Covenant – symbolizes the heavenly Jerusalem and true freedom.
It
is interesting that Paul does not mention any intermediate mountain here, as he
did with the Hagar symbolism (the physical Mount Sinai). Still, although not mentioned by Paul right
here, we might appropriately deduce from this parallel scripture in the book of
Hebrews, that the heavenly Mount Zion
might rightly be implied as part of the heavenly Jerusalem:
Hebrews
12:
22: But you are come unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the
living God, the heavenly Jerusalem,
and to an innumerable company of angels…
24: And to Jesus the mediator of the New Covenant…
How
very well these two epistles – Hebrews and Galatians – dovetail!
When
Paul wrote “the mother of us all,” he was speaking physically of Sarah who was the ancestral
mother of all Israelites as well as,
to a more limited extent, to the other physical descendants of Isaac.
But
spiritually, as we learned in our
recent study of Romans 11, Sarah is also the mother of the Gentile converts who are grafted into Israel.
Please
notice that God, through Paul, places a great and significant accent on freedom here in Galatians 4:26 – freedom
from circumcision and freedom from the necessity to participate in the Sinai
Covenant’s system of ritual sacrificial law, which was then becoming obsolete
(Hebrews 8:13).
This
may not seem like as big a deal for us now as it was thousands of years ago;
but it really was a big deal for
those people back then because they had Jews and Judaizers who were pushing the
continuation of those things on them.
There may be some possibility that that kind of deception could come
again and that end-time Judaizers might once again put pressure on God’s people
to start doing some of those obsolete things again. Back in Galatians 4:
27: For it is written {Isaiah 54:1}, “Rejoice, you barren
that bear not; break forth and cry,
you that travail not: for the desolate has many more children than she which has a husband.”
This
poor desolate, barren woman who was unable to travail
or to bear children was, of course, Sarah.
Although she did have a husband, it is understandable that poor
Sarah did feel somewhat desolate at
the age of ninety with no children or
grandchildren.
I
understand that we do have brethren who have not been able to have children;
and I know that that is a great trial for them.
It is something that we should pray about on behalf of those
brethren. In this day and age, in our
hedonistic era, there are so many who don’t care about such things and have no
desire for the blessings of parenthood; but in those “Bible times,” children were considered a blessing and the lack
of them was considered a curse. We think
about poor Sarah, and her neighbours whispering behind their hands, “I wonder
what the princess did so very wrong that God has cursed her so?” It really was a huge trial. It should be perceived as a huge trial now;
but again, to so many in our modern society, it is not.
But,
as we read back in Genesis 21:6-7, once Isaac was born, Sarah did rejoice. She did what it said in Galatians 4:27 and
Isaiah 54:1: she broke forth and cried
out in sheer joy
As
we continue through this, please keep in mind that Sarah was also symbolic of
Mary, Isaac was symbolic of Jesus and Abraham was symbolic of God the
Father. Actually, in many miraculous
respects, God was the real father of
Isaac (as well as Jesus, of course); and hence, He was kind of a husband to both Sarah and Mary. Back in Galatians 4:
28: Now we,
brethren, as Isaac was, are the children
of promise.
Yes,
it is true that the physical
Israelites were physical descendants
of Isaac. Because Isaac’s birth was such
a great miracle, so the very existence of Israel as a nation was, and still is,
a very great miracle.
But
again, more importantly, it was Jesus sacrifice that enabled the Gentile
converts (likely including many of the Galatian brethren) to be spiritually grafted into Israel (Romans
11) – specifically into spiritual
Israel which is God’s true church; and thus they too become the descendants of
Isaac, Sarah and Abraham – and included, as referred to by Paul here, as
“children of promise.”
29a: But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the
spirit…
Hagar’s
son Ishmael (the son “that was born after the flesh”) persecuted Sarah’s young
son, Isaac (the son “that was born after the spirit”). Here is how that episode is mentioned in
Genesis:
Genesis
21:9:
And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Why
would Sarah get so upset by this mocking?
We might think that this “mocking” was just a bit of friendly,
step-brotherly jesting, or perhaps just a bit of harmless ribbing; and that it
certainly shouldn’t have caused the history-changing outcry that it did.
But
I believe that there was much more to
it than that. The word mocking here is translated from the
Hebrew verb tsachaq (Strong’s 6711)
and is translated elsewhere as sport,
play and, perhaps most significantly, laugh.
As
this was the same word used when Abraham and Sarah laughed at the idea of them having a baby together at their
advanced age (Genesis 17:17; 18:12-15), maybe God initially allowed this mocking laughter to teach them an
interrelated lesson (as He sometimes did – and still does) – in other words,
not to laugh inappropriately.
Isaac’s
Hebrew name, Yitschaq (Strong’s 3327), was derived from the verb tsachaq (Strong’s 6711) which means
"he laughs." The extended
meanings of the word tsachaq are: To jest,
make sport of or toy with.
Also,
let’s go back and take a look at the word persecuted
in Galatians 4:29. It is translated from
the Greek verb dioko (Strong’s 1377)
which is a prolonged and causative form of the verb dio which means to flee. As well as persecuted, the Greek meanings of this word dioko are quite revealing to this particular context and
circumstance with regards to Ishmael and Isaac.
Please peruse this list and think about Ishmael and his mocking of
Isaac. They include:
·
To
make another person run or flee
·
To
put another person to flight
·
To
drive another person away
·
To
harass, trouble, mistreat or molest another person
·
To
pursue another person (in a hostile manner)
·
To
run after another person
·
To
seek after another person eagerly
·
To
earnestly endeavour to acquire
·
To
run swiftly in order to catch a person or thing
·
To
press on
·
To
run swiftly in a race to reach the goal
In
order to properly understand Ishmael’s mocking and persecuting of Isaac, we
need to remember just who Abraham, Sarah and Isaac actually were. Sometimes we think of them as a mere
wandering bunch of Bedouins, gypsies, tinkers or hippies. But no!
Abraham was the equivalent of a king
– the human symbol of God the Father – the most important and high being in
the whole universe! Isaac was a prince – the human symbol of Jesus
Christ. Sarah was a noblewoman and a
princess – a human symbol and forerunner of Jesus’ human mother, Mary; and as
such, the human symbol of God’s true church (Matthew 12:46-50). These three people – Sarah, Isaac, and
Abraham – had in their bodies the genes of the royal line of David and of Jesus
Christ.
On
the other hand, Ishmael, was the mere son of an Egyptian slave! And here he was,
persecuting, ridiculing, and making sport of one of the most important princes
in the history of the world!
When
we consider the extended meanings of the Greek verb dioko (this is my own speculation here), perhaps Ishmael and Hagar
thought that, by means of such persecution and mocking, they had some chance of
taking some – or even all – of the prize that God had reserved for Isaac.
Back
to Galatians 4… and repeating the first part of verse 29:
29a: But as then he that was born after the flesh {Ishmael}
persecuted him that was born after the spirit {Isaac}…
29b: … even so it is now.
What
did Paul mean by this? Were the
Ishmaelites persecuting or mocking the Israelites during the apostolic era in
the first century?
In
some physical ways, yes they were! As
mentioned earlier, the wicked Herods who reigned as puppet kings over Judea
from 74BC to 100AD were not Jewish or even Israelite. They were part Edomite and part Nabatean
Arab. The Nabateans were descendants of
Ishmael’s firstborn son Nebaioth or Nebajoth (who is mentioned in five Old
Testament scriptures). Nebaioth’s Arab name is Nabit (which means firstborn
or firstfruit in the Arabic
language).
So
that was the physical part of the
Ishmaelites’ persecution of Israel. But
please remember from back in verse 24 that this whole section of scripture was
an allegory. The apostle Paul was
writing this part of it in inspired allegorical,
symbolic language. And we need to remember what that symbolism
was. Hagar and Ishmael picture the bondage of the Sinai Covenant with its
ritual sacrificial laws. Sarah and Isaac
picture the relative freedom of the
Grace Part of the Abrahamic Covenant, the New Covenant and the true
church.
Much
of the persecution against God’s early church came from “the circumcision” –
the Jews! As we read earlier, many or
even most of troubles within the early church were raised by Jews or Judaizers
who wanted to push the terms of the Sinai
Covenant onto the brethren – as well as some of the obsolete terms of the Race Part of the Abrahamic Covenant – specifically circumcision.
What
was God’s solution to this?
30: Nevertheless what says the scripture {Genesis 21:10}? “Cast
out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.”
It
was Sarah who initially asked Abraham to cast out Hagar and Ishmael; but the LORD
backed up Sarah’s request, and He repeated it to Abraham as a command (Genesis
21:12). In effect, God was saying, “The son of that slave shall not receive any
of the inheritance that I have given to the son of the free-woman.”
Once
again, the antitype of the bondwoman, Hagar, and her son, Ishmael, is the
relative bondage of the Sinai Covenant and its ritual sacrificial laws. Through the apostle Paul, God was saying that
they too must be cast out!
Why? Because that covenant and those laws have no
part in the inheritance which we –
the people of God’s Church – share
with our elder brothers and fellow-heirs – Isaac and his antitype, Jesus
Christ.
31: So then, brethren, we are not children of the
bondwoman {i.e. Hagar,
Ishmael and the Sinai Covenant}, but of the free {i.e. Sarah, Isaac, Jesus Christ and the Grace Part of
the Abrahamic Covenant}.
Whether
we are physical Israelites, physical Gentiles, or a Heinz 57 mixture of the
two, if we have God’s Holy Spirit dwelling in us, then we are spiritual Israelites,
we are spiritual Isaacites, we are spiritual Abrahamites. We are spiritual descendants and heirs of
Abraham, Sarah and Isaac. And we are
fellow heirs with Jesus Christ.
JHP/pp/jhp