Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence
We left off reading at verse 4
Galatians 4.7-
May 19th 2019
Milk
4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, (who were the Jews, the Children of Israel) that we (those who put their faith on and in Christ) might receive the adoption of sons.
6 And because you are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
7 Wherefore you are no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Them – We – YOU
He came for . . .
Them – The COI under the law, so that
We – the Justified by faith in Him who came – might receive the adoption of Sons (and then Paul says to them them, the Galatians) and because
YOU – those who had been adopted by the Father as Sons,
Let’s continue on at verse 6 where Paul writes:
6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
As a consequence of our being adopted into the family of God, Paul here says that God does something.
Let us remember that we were first children. By what? By faith. And as children we were under tutors and governors until we are called by God and adopted as Sons and Daughters.
And because you are sons or daughters, verse six says, “God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts.”
And we are left holding a somewhat difficult to determine statement that leaves us asking:
What does Paul mean when he uses speaks of God has sent forth (to those he has adopted as Sons and Daughters) “the Spirit of His Son into your hearts?”
There are several popular approaches to interpretation to this.
The first interpretation is that the Spirit is the Holy Spirit, which is often synonymous with the Spirit of His Son or the Spirit of Christ as there is one Spirit and we are all unified in and through that one Spirit.
Scripturally, this seems to be the most consistent as it was the Holy Spirit which animated Jesus in his human life (remember, Matthew says that the child is of the Holy Spirit) and which then descended on Him at His baptism anointing Him in his ministry and priest and King.
Then we know that Romans speaks of the Spirit of Christ synonymously with the Holy Spirit, saying
Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Here Paul uses Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ and Christ as convertible terms.
Add to this the fact that in John 3:34 Christ is described as dispensing the Spirit. In Mark 1:10 and John 1:32 he is described as having the fullness of the Spirit, and in John 15:26, 16:7-15 he sends the Spirit from the Father to the disciples he, Jesus, is said to be the burden of the Spirit’s testimony.
So this is the first take – that even though we all begin as God’s children by faith, we are under tutors and governors until God adopts us as his Sons and Daughters and in so doing sends us the Spirit of His Son, which according to this stance is the same thing as the Holy Spirit.
However, if this is the case, were we ever given the Spirit when we first believed and became children?
When we were born from above, wasn’t that receiving the Holy Spirit as scripture says, No man can call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Spirit?
If this is the case, what is God sending to our hearts as described here in verse six?
MORE of the same Spirit? A double portion as it were?
Perhaps at belief the Holy Spirit rests upon us as it did the prophets of Old and at the adoption of Sons and Daughters God sends the Holy Spirit into our very hearts – after all, this is what the passage says?
However, at the risk of overextending ourselves theologically, could this passage speak of something different than the Holy Spirit?
Turning to Philippians 1:18-20 we read:
What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,
20 According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death.
In other words, is there a Spirit of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, that is different or that is somehow distinguished from the Holy Spirit.
Some commentators suggest so – and I cannot help but wonder.
The reason I wonder is while the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of God was certainly fully present in Jesus of Nazareth – after all – the Holy Thing was a product of the Holy Spirit – was or is there a spirit of Jesus that was created when flesh and spirit created him; a spirit that grew in wisdom and stature, that learned obedience through the things He suffered, and therefore due to his flesh is tangibly different from the Holy Spirit by itself?
Afterall, the Holy Spirit did not have to learn to submit its will to the Father, was not attacked and had to forgive, nor did the Holy Spirit have to learn to let the Spirit of His Father reign over the will of His flesh?
For these reasons and more, I presently side more with the idea that receiving the Spirit of Christ in our hearts from the Father at adoption of Sons and Daughters as somehow different or unique to receiving the Holy Spirit at conversion.
Could be wrong, but there seems to be something more “son and daughter-like” in receiving the Spirit of Christ by God in our hearts at adoption than simply receiving the Holy Spirit upon belief.
And let me say this as long as we are here – perhaps this is the actual tangible difference between people who receive the Holy Spirit in their lives to guide them and lead them to love (like some Buddhists, or Muslims or whatever) and those who have been adopted by God as His own Sons and Daughters.
Those who are His Sons and Daughters have actually received the very Spirit of His only human Son in them!
I mean, let’s go a bit deeper and ask: What was it that animated the man Jesus of Nazareth?
He was the Word of God – the Logos made flesh, right? That was what was in his incarnate body! The very logos of God.
To receive the “Spirit of his Son” in our hearts might take the individual recipient way beyond the pale of merely possessing or being influenced by the Holy Spirit but actually equip them with the very logos of God – providing them with the same logos that was given His only begotten!
If those who receive the Spirit of His Son in their hearts are heirs, and joint-heirs with Christ, it seems to me that there could be something to this.
And if there is something to this, then this is the goal and objective of the Christian – to become Sons and Daughters by and through God sending the Spirit of His Son into the hearts of those he chooses.
Therefore, the goal is not to be born-again as babes. That is the start. The goal is Christian maturation to the point that we are able to bear fruit of the Spirit and have God become our father by sending into our hearts the very actual spirit of His Son.
Paul describes something that occurs at this adoption – and says:
“And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.”
This line directly describes that as Sons and Daughters there is an immediate and natural
Ro 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
To me, it is in the suffering as Sons and Daughters that we will find ourselves, as Christ himself did, crying out personally and intimately to our papa God.
In the Jewish Babylonian Gemara, it reads that slaves were not permitted to use the title of Abba in addressing the master of the family to which they belonged.
It appears that Paul is gently referring to this as a means to show that when a person internally relates to God as their papa (Abba) they cannot any longer be seen as servants – especially the servants of sin.
This is why he continues and says
7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Wherefore (or in consequence of this privilege of addressing God as your Father) “you are no longer a servant infant or child” under tutors or governors,
“But a son.”
We call Jesus Christ the Son of God – which he is.
The ONLY begotten Son of God – Jesus of Nazareth. Unlike us, begotten by the Holy Spirit, the Word of God with us.
God with us.
There is not a single issue with human beings, first by faith, then by love, who have matured in their walk, and have had God Himself send the Spirit of His Son into their hearts, calling themselves Sons and Daughters of God.
There is not one thing wrong with human beings calling themselves heirs of God, as calling themselves joint-heirs with Christ.
Of course, these titles are not bestowed by the fleshly merits of a person but are all based on their willingness to let God work in and through them – JUST LIKE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON DID WHEN HE WALKED THE EARTH NOT DOING HIS WILL BUT THE WILL OF HIS FATHER.
And so it is with any and all Sons or Daughters who have via spiritual maturation allowed God to work in and through them!
They are God’s Sons and Daughters – His heirs! Joint-heirs with Christ.
I know I harp on this a bit too much, and trusting God is in control should probably rest a bit on it, but to focus on the regenerative experience alone is akin to having a baby and then focusing on keeping that infant a baby for the rest of its life.
Because it is by and through the washing of the Word that believers learn to become Son and Daughters – through the ingestion of the milk and meat of the Word – it is vital for believers to hear and be taught the Word as much as it is vital for an infant to be fed often.
To just gather to worship God with gratitude over having been saved over and over again, and not be exposed to the washing of the word as often as possible, is contrary to the reason God saved us in the first place!
So Paul adds:
and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
I’m not going to belabor the point but listen to this last line:
and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
. . . then an heir of God through Christ.
. . . then an heir of God through Christ.
(Beat – verse 8)
At this point Paul seems to address the Galatians who have come out of paganism and he does this with the use of the word, Alla, translated, howbeit, and he says
8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
In the previous verses Paul had evidently had the Jewish converts in mind and had described their former condition as one of servitude to the Mosaic rites and customs compared with the freedom imparted by the gospel.
Now he refers to the Gentiles to illustrate their servitude.
The sense is, “If the Jews were in such a state of servitude, so were you.”
There was a time when “you knew not God.”
And in your state of heathenism, you did service (you were slaves) “to them which by nature are no gods.”
Paul seems to be speaking of pagan idols here or false gods.
They were imaginary gods lacking all divinity, objects in creation like the sun, and wind, and streams or they were departed heroes that had been elevated to be objects of worship.
And while their gods were not real their slavery to them was as they demanded obedience, offerings, and allegiances to its hollow demands.
Idolatry will always amount to empty slavery which typically becomes relentless.
Idols are cruel and relentless masters demanding constant offerings in terms of time, gold, and obligations.
The Gaul’s were once under such bondage, but Paul adds:
9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
The sense is, that since they had been made free from their slavery to false gods and had found the freedom and liberty in the worship of the true God so it was totally absurd for them to embrace ANYthing that would bring them back into slavery – including embracing elements of the Law the Jews were under.
In verse 8 we come to an interesting correction Paul makes. He says:
9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Why does Paul correct himself after writing:
“But now, after that ye have known God . . .”
The purpose of this correction appears to be to avoid the impression that their acquaintance with God was owing to themselves.
We tend to make this mistake – even if its just for conversational ease – when we say things like:
“When I found God,” or “when I accepted God into my life.”
Paul even corrects himself here after saying something like this and adds after saying:
“But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God”
Of course, we speak of God being all knowing so what gives? Are we not known by God until we are receive as children by faith?
Again, context helps us discern.
I suggest that we are all known of God as according to Jesus he knows when a sparrow falls from the sky and the hairs of our heads.
But the meaning of our being known of God (I would add) as Children or Sons.
In other words, Paul is speaking of the point when God recognizes us as His and not him knowing of us generally.
This line is in harmony with the fact that we do not choose to become sons or daughters of God but God is the one who appoints the Spirit of His Son to come into our hearts (as it says in verse six) and this is what I think he is speaking to.
And so having been known of God as Sons and Daughters Paul asks:
“How do you turn again to weak and beggarly elements (meaning the Law and its demands, which are not really less demanding than that of idols in their lives) “whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage.”
He says that it seems as though they wish to be back in slavery to something! And he adds verse ten some of the things to which they had adopted that are outside the free walk in the Grace of God, saying:
10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
In addition to circumcision these are some of the other elements of the Law that the Galatians had embraced – they observance of days, months, times and years.
The days referred to here are doubtlessly the days of the Jewish festivals – and there were numerous days of such observances specified in the Tanakh but the Jews had added many others including days that commemorated the destruction and rebuilding of the temple and of other important events in their history.
The question is was Paul speaking also of the Sabbath?
Many commentators say no to this, because they say Jesus observed the Sabbath so this was not meant.
However, in Colossians 2:13 Paul does write:
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
How was the Sabbath day a shadow of things to come?
We know the answer.
The Sabbath day was a day of rest. Jesus said, “Come to me and I will give you rest.” And so in Christ (the thing to come) Christians find rest everyday of the week, not just on a specific day.
Days of the week are intrinsic to material law and material religion. They make us feel holy and righteous through external observances.
But in the end they wind up as systems of bondage, something Christ came to remove from the lives of people.
Under the law six days were servile culminating with one day and the end of the week for rest – and even that rest was regimented and therefore a form of bondage.
No more days.
“And months,” which seem to refer to the festivals of the new moon which too were kept by the Jews (and are described in Numbers 10:10 and 28:11-14).
On this festival, in addition to the daily sacrifice, two bullocks, a ram, and seven sheep of a year old were offered in sacrifice.
The appearance of the new moon was announced by the sound of trumpets. Paul eliminated the festival of months from the lives of believers in Galatia.
“And times” which appear to speak to more festivals but those that appear periodically, like the Passover, the feast of Pentecost, and the feast of tabernacles.
“And years.” Some people don’t realize that there were annual celebrations in the Old Covenant including what is called, a sabbatical year or year of jubilee.
Again, Paul includes participation in these as forms of bondage.
So, let’s read on from verse 11-16 as Paul remarks:
11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.
12 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye have not injured me at all.
13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.
16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
All right back to verse 11 where Paul adds some personal notes to the letter and says:
11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.
Instead of I am afraid of you it better reads: “I have fears respecting you and your walk in the faith.”
Obviously they had been easily perverted and turned back to the servitude of ceremonies and rites, that he was apprehensive that there were any who really understood Christ from the heart at this point.
Like Paul, I have to admit being blown away by the people I have known – and when I say blown away I mean without any judgement or condemnation – but I am forever shaken when someone who appears to be a sold out believer turns either from Christ all together or to beggarly elements of the Law.
In large part I blame the fact that they were never steeped in the Word but were instead steeped in traditions, or emotionalism, or church playing – but even in this there are exceptions.
So what does Paul day to these Gauls?
(verse 12)
12 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye have not injured me at all.
Of course, this passage, by virtue of its obscurity is debated by many scholars because who can really say what Paul means here?
But we will try – as he says, “Brethren, I beseech you,”
So he is still calling them brethren and has not jumped to the conclusion that they have been cast off or are heretical as a result of dabbling with the law.
Brethren, I beseech you.
“be as I am; for I am as ye are:”
This sounds like he is saying,
“Let you and I be as if we were all one. Think yourselves to be very me as I see no difference between you and myself.”
This was the way Paul says he saw them and so when he says, “be like me” it seems possible that this is what he meant.
We might amplify this meaning by thinking that Paul was saying, “look,
I’m a Jew by birth who no longer cares about the law – be like me – because neither should you!”
And then he adds, “You have not injured me at all,” which perhaps means, “this is not personal. I have no complaint against any of you as you have not done me any personal wrong. In fact, he seems to add at verse 13
13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
I see this as an introduction to what he is about to say though other scholars seem to think he is sort of appealing to their compassion for the suffering Paul endured on their behalf to bring them the Gospel.
I see the passage as Paul reminding them that when he came to them he was suffering what he calls, “an infirmity of the flesh,” and it is to this infirmity that he now speaks, saying:
14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
Again, we do not know what this was. Because of what Paul will write here we suspect it has something to do with his eyes but that is pure conjecture.
The word translated temptation means test, my trial or the thing which is trying on a person.
Paul admits to being afflicted with various calamities or infirmities when he came to them but that this did not hinder their receiving him as an angel from heaven or even as Christ Jesus.
The variations of interpretation of this verse is vast and some go so far as to say that this should read, “And your temptation which was in my flesh you despised not.”
If it is supposed to read, “your,” then it means that they were tempted to reject him due to his infirmities and so it sort of amounts to about the same thing.
The general sense is that Paul had some bodily infirmity which was a great trial to him, which they bore with through great patience and affection.
15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.
The words, “ye spake of” are not in the better manuscripts, and where the King James writes:
Where is then the blessedness, other translations write:
“What was” in its place, meaning, “what was the blessedness?
And he replies:
For I bear you record (I testify) that if it had been possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me.
Whether this was an expression to illustrate their allegiance or a direct reference to Paul having a trial in and through his eyes we don’t know.
What we do know is that they loved him so much that they would have given to him anything, however dear.
But now, there is a problem – so much so that where they once appeared to have really loved Paul, he now asks:
16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
We will stop here.
Questions/Comments
Prayer
