Galatians Chapter 4
Galatians 4:1–3 (NKJV)
“Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world.”
Commentary
A. No longer under bondage to the basic elements, we are God’s children.
Verse 1: “Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all”
Paul opens with an analogy that connects the end of Galatians chapter 3 to the doctrinal emphasis of chapter 4. Although a child is legally the heir of all, his condition is functionally indistinguishable from that of a servant. He lacks authority, freedom, and autonomy.
The term “child” (Greek: nēpios) denotes one who is immature, lacking legal rights, though destined for inheritance.
Though “master of all” by right, the child cannot yet exercise dominion. The illustration underscores a temporary restriction placed on the heir’s freedom.
This illustration mirrors the believer’s status under the Law. Though destined to be an heir through faith (Galatians 3:29), under the Law the believer lived as one still subject to restriction, discipline, and guardianship.
Verse 2: “But is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father.”
In Roman culture—more in view than Jewish practice here—a child did not attain adulthood based on age alone. The father set the appointed time. Until then, guardians (Greek: epitropos) and stewards (Greek: oikonomos) were entrusted with full authority over the child’s affairs.
These were not simply babysitters—they held real authority.
Paul draws from Roman practice, such as the Liberalia ceremony on March 17th, when a boy might exchange his toga praetexta (youthful garment) for the toga virilis (man's garment), signifying adulthood and sonship.
Spiritually, the guardians and stewards reflect the Law of Moses, which held the Jewish people in discipline until Christ came (cf. Galatians 3:24–25). The Law functioned as a divine steward—legally binding, authoritative, but temporary in purpose.
Verse 3: “Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world.”
The comparison now moves from illustration to application. “We” refers to both Jews and Gentiles, who were all under stoicheia tou kosmou—the “elements of the world.”
The term stoicheia (στοιχεῖα) originally meant basic principles, or the ABCs of learning. It came to include the elemental forces of nature, human religious systems, and legalistic principles of works-righteousness.
Paul shows that both the pagan religions and the Mosaic Law operated on a cause-and-effect principle: do good, receive good; do evil, receive punishment.
This is the natural principle embedded in man’s mind—what might be termed “cosmic justice,” karma, or earning one’s way. Yet in Christ, this principle is overthrown.
Grace disrupts the stoicheia. The believer no longer lives under a system of merit and demerit. Instead, he is adopted as a son, by grace through faith in Christ (cf. Galatians 3:26).
Paul’s point: Before Christ, humanity—Jew and Gentile alike—was in a condition of spiritual childhood, under the bondage of rudimentary principles, whether Jewish Law or Gentile religion.
Theological Implications
Spiritual Immaturity Pre-Christ
Under the Law, Israel was spiritually immature—not fully realizing the relationship they would have in Christ. The Law, with its ceremonies and rituals, was never the end goal. It was the steward until the fullness of time came (cf. Galatians 4:4).Legalism as Bondage
The Law did not produce freedom but highlighted man’s sin (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7). The bondage under the Law is not inferior because the Law was flawed, but because man, in his fallen nature, could never fulfill it.Grace Contrasts the “ABC” Worldview
Paul draws a stark contrast between a worldview of religious merit—do good, get rewarded—and the Gospel of grace. Grace is not earned; it is bestowed by God's initiative (Ephesians 2:8–9).False Teaching and Stoicheia
Paul will later confront false teaching that subtly reinserts these elemental principles (cf. Colossians 2:8, 20). Any form of Christianity that substitutes grace for ritualism or legalism regresses to bondage under the stoicheia.
Cross-References (NKJV)
Galatians 3:24–25: “Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.”
Romans 6:14: “For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.”
Colossians 2:8: “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.”
Colossians 2:20: “Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations…”
Galatians 4:4–5 (NKJV)
“But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”
Commentary
2. The Liberation of Heirs from Their Bondage
a. “But when the fullness of the time had come…”
God’s plan unfolds with sovereign precision. The phrase “the fullness of the time” refers to the divinely appointed moment in redemptive history when all prophetic, cultural, political, linguistic, and spiritual factors aligned according to God’s will.
The Greek word for “fullness” (pleroma) conveys the idea of something being completed to its appointed measure. This is not just chronological fulfillment (chronos), but kairos—the appointed, divinely orchestrated season.
Jesus Christ did not arrive too early nor too late, but precisely when the world stage had been providentially prepared.
Historical background confirming this perfect timing includes:
The pax Romana—a period of relative peace and centralized imperial control—made travel and communication easier across the Roman Empire.
A universal trade language—Koine Greek—allowed the rapid spread of the Gospel.
Moral decay throughout both Jewish and Gentile society fostered spiritual hunger. The insufficiency of both paganism and legalistic Judaism had reached a breaking point.
Prophetic timing—The 483 years of Daniel’s prophecy were nearly completed (Daniel 9:24–26), pinpointing the time of Messiah’s appearing.
This divine precision counters any human claim that God was “delayed.” Paul reminds the Galatians that the Law was a temporary measure—“until the seed should come to whom the promise was made” (Galatians 3:19).
b. “God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law…”
This single clause proclaims both the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ. It is a high Christological statement, asserting both His eternal preexistence and His incarnational mission.
“God sent forth His Son” implies Christ’s preexistence and voluntary mission. The Son was not created—He was sent forth. This is the language of divine commission, not origination. It emphasizes that redemption begins in heaven, not on earth.
“Born of a woman” emphasizes Christ’s humanity, aligning with the prophecy of Genesis 3:15: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed.” This veiled reference to the virgin birth highlights that while Christ entered fully into human nature, He was not born of man.
“Born under the law” means Jesus subjected Himself to the very legal system that held mankind in bondage. He lived in perfect obedience to it (Matthew 5:17) and fulfilled all its righteous demands (Romans 8:3–4). He submitted to the covenantal obligations of Israel in order to redeem those bound under that very covenant.
Hebrews 2:14 (NKJV): “Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.”
c. “To redeem those who were under the law…”
The purpose of Christ’s incarnation is clearly soteriological. He came “to redeem”—to purchase out of slavery those bound under the law.
The word “redeem” is from the Greek exagorazo, meaning “to buy out of the marketplace,” never to be returned to slavery. The imagery is that of the ancient slave markets. Christ not only paid our debt; He removed us from the auction block entirely.
Those “under the law” refers primarily to Israel, who were under Mosaic covenantal obligations. However, Paul has already expanded the category of bondage to include all humanity under sin and elemental principles (cf. Galatians 3:22; 4:3).
This is the second time Paul uses the term “redeem” in this letter:
Galatians 3:13 (NKJV): “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’).”
By bearing the curse of the law in our place, Jesus satisfied its justice and extended grace. He fulfilled the legal demand and bore the wrath that we deserved.
d. “That we might receive the adoption as sons.”
God’s plan did not stop with redemption. He moves beyond mere liberation from slavery—He elevates the redeemed to sonship.
“Adoption as sons” (Greek: huiothesia) refers to the legal and relational act whereby God grants the full rights of inheritance, privilege, and name to those who were formerly outsiders.
This is not natural sonship—it is bestowed. And it is not merely restoration to Adamic status, but an advancement. Adam was a created being in relationship with God; believers are now adopted sons, co-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17).
Romans 8:15 (NKJV): “For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, ‘Abba, Father.’”
This adoption brings:
A new identity – We are no longer slaves or orphans, but sons (Galatians 4:7).
A new inheritance – Joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17).
A new intimacy – We call God “Abba,” a term of personal endearment and trust (Galatians 4:6).
This was modeled in Roman law, where adopted sons were given full legal rights—equal to those born naturally—and their previous debts and status were erased. Paul uses this Roman concept to stress our irrevocable standing in God’s family.
Application
The Gospel is not only a rescue from judgment; it is a repositioning into divine privilege. We are not simply pardoned criminals; we are embraced as children.
Like John Newton, the author of Amazing Grace, we must remember our former condition so that we do not grow cold in our gratitude. Newton placed Deuteronomy 15:15 above his mantel to remind himself: “You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you.”
We must avoid the Galatian error—seeking to return to legal bondage when we have been granted the full rights of sons. To do so is not only folly; it is a denial of grace.
Summary
At just the right moment in redemptive history, God sent His eternal Son into the world as a man, under the Law, to accomplish redemption.
Through Christ’s substitutionary death, we were purchased from bondage—not merely to be forgiven, but to be adopted into God’s family as sons.
This adoption grants us rights, relationship, and reward that surpass anything Adam ever possessed.
To return to legalism, as the Galatians were tempted to do, is to abandon sonship for slavery—a tragic and unnecessary regression.
Galatians 4:6–7 (NKJV)
“And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.”
3. Celebrating Our Sonship
a. “And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts…”
Paul now moves from positional sonship to experiential assurance of that sonship. This is not a generic affirmation of moral transformation; it is a deeply Trinitarian act of God, where the Father sends the Spirit of the Son to indwell the believer’s heart and give voice to our filial relationship with Him.
The verb “sent forth” (Greek: exapostellō) is the same used in verse 4 when God “sent forth His Son.” Just as the Son was sent for redemption, the Spirit is now sent for assurance.
This indwelling is a definitive proof of spiritual regeneration. As Paul writes elsewhere:
Romans 8:9 (NKJV) – “Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.”
This is not mere positional theology—it is existential experience. The Spirit does not merely reside in heaven; He takes up residence in the believer’s heart (Greek: kardia)—the seat of thoughts, desires, and affections.
b. “…crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’”
The Spirit does not whisper; He cries out (krazo), a term of emotional intensity. This is not timid, formulaic prayer—it is the Spirit of God igniting the childlike confidence to call God what Jesus Himself called Him: “Abba, Father.”
Mark 14:36 (NKJV) – “And He said, ‘Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will.’”
In that moment of agony in Gethsemane, Jesus cried out to the Father not in theological abstraction, but in intimate relationship. Paul tells us we have been given that same spiritual access—not because of our righteousness, but because of Christ’s righteousness credited to us.
“Abba” is Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, denoting intimacy, trust, and familial closeness. It was used in the home by young children—a respectful, loving term closer to “Papa” than the more formal “Father.”
The double phrasing “Abba, Father” (Aramaic followed by Greek pater) affirms the unity of Jew and Gentile alike in their approach to God.
This crying out reflects the assurance of adoption—not a tentative hope, but a Spirit-driven confidence.
Romans 8:15 (NKJV) – “For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, ‘Abba, Father.’”
c. The Trinity in Our Sonship
This verse subtly but powerfully affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. Notice:
God the Father is the one who sends.
God the Son is the model and basis of our sonship.
God the Holy Spirit, called the “Spirit of His Son,” is the one who lives within us and causes us to cry out with assurance.
This Trinitarian orchestration of redemption and adoption is central to New Testament soteriology. Each Person of the Godhead is active and distinct, yet unified in purpose.
d. “Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son…”
This is the logical conclusion Paul draws from the indwelling Spirit and the status conferred by Christ. The believer’s identity is permanently transformed: no longer a doulos (bondservant/slave), but a huios (son).
This echoes Jesus’ words in John 8:35 (NKJV) – “And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever.”
The believer is not merely a forgiven servant, but a beloved child.
Paul’s choice of words is deliberate. The Galatians, tempted to return to the Mosaic Law, are reminded that the law treats them as slaves—but grace has made them sons. To go back would be to surrender that sonship and return to spiritual bondage.
e. “…and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.”
This climactic phrase brings the redemptive logic full circle.
If we are sons, we are heirs—kleronomos in Greek—those legally entitled to inherit all that belongs to the Father.
This includes:
Eternal life (Titus 3:7)
The kingdom of God (James 2:5)
Glory (Romans 8:17)
God Himself – “The LORD is the portion of my inheritance…” (Psalm 16:5)
And all of this is “through Christ.” There is no inheritance apart from Him, no sonship without union to Him, and no indwelling Spirit except by His gift.
Ephesians 1:11 (NKJV) – “In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will.”
Theological Summary
God the Father redeems us by sending the Son.
God the Son fulfills the law, redeems us from slavery, and grants us sonship.
God the Holy Spirit enters our hearts to assure us that our sonship is real and irrevocable.
Our salvation is not only about being forgiven—it is about being adopted, indwelt, assured, and given full inheritance.
To revert to the Law, as the Galatians were tempted to do, would be to reject the role of the Spirit, to deny the sonship granted in Christ, and to live again as slaves instead of heirs.
Application
Live in assurance – If you are in Christ, you are no longer a spiritual orphan. God is not a cold Judge over you; He is your Father.
Pray in intimacy – The cry “Abba, Father” is not merely theological language. It is to be the tone of our daily communion with God.
Reject legalism – To attempt to earn what has already been given by adoption is to insult the grace that saved you.
Rejoice in inheritance – Our inheritance is not gold or land—it is God Himself. And if we have Him, we have all.
Galatians 4:8–11 (NKJV)
“But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods. But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.”
4. A Decision to Make: Living Under the Elements of the World or as a Son of God
a. “But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods.”
Paul begins by reminding the Galatians of their spiritual past. Before their conversion, they were idolaters, ignorant of the true and living God. Their religious lives were characterized by devotion to false deities—things which by nature are not gods.
Paul is speaking primarily to Gentile believers, who worshiped pagan idols. Their former servitude was not neutral religiosity—it was bondage to lies, to demonic systems dressed up in the appearance of divine truth (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:20).
This is the same critique found in Romans 1:25 (NKJV): “[They] exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.”
The key implication is this: legalism, despite its Jewish origin and biblical language, is not substantially different from paganism. Both are human systems attempting to relate to God through works, effort, ritual, and appeasement—ultimately denying grace.
b. “But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God…”
This clause reveals a dramatic transformation in the Galatians’ identity. No longer ignorant idolaters, they now have a covenant relationship with the living God. But Paul adds a subtle, theologically rich correction:
“Or rather are known by God” shifts the emphasis from human initiative to divine sovereignty. The believer’s knowledge of God is secondary to God’s knowledge of them.
This echoes Matthew 7:23 (NKJV): “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’”
Salvation is not merely knowing about God—it is being known by God.2 Timothy 2:19 (NKJV) affirms: “The Lord knows those who are His…”
God’s foreknowing is relational, not just informational. To be known by God is to be chosen, loved, and redeemed through Christ. That status cannot be earned by works, only received by grace.
c. “How is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?”
Here Paul expresses profound pastoral bewilderment. The phrase “turn again” (Greek: epistrepho) implies a backward move—not progress, but regression.
“The weak and beggarly elements” are the same stoicheia Paul mentioned in Galatians 4:3. These are the basic, rudimentary principles of religion: performance-based acceptance, ritual observance, law-keeping, and moralism.
Though the Galatians never followed the Mosaic Law before their conversion, legalism is the same in spirit as paganism. Both are based on the principle of “do this and live,” and both deny the sufficiency of Christ.
Weak because these elements cannot empower a holy life.
Beggarly because they cannot enrich the soul. They leave the person as spiritually impoverished as before.
Paul sees their desire to reenter this system as willful enslavement—“you desire again to be in bondage.” Having been set free, they now long for the shackles again.
d. “You observe days and months and seasons and years.”
This refers to the calendar-based legalism the Judaizers were enforcing. This included:
Days – likely Sabbaths
Months – new moon celebrations
Seasons – festivals like Passover or Tabernacles
Years – sabbatical years or the year of Jubilee
Observance in itself was not the issue. What Paul condemns is trusting in observance as a means of spiritual growth or favor with God.
Colossians 2:16–17 (NKJV): “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.”
To return to observing such things as obligatory for salvation or sanctification is to replace Christ with shadows, and sonship with servitude.
e. “I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.”
This is not a casual remark. Paul expresses pastoral anguish. The word “labored” (Greek: kopiao) means “to toil to the point of exhaustion.”
Paul is not concerned for his own reputation. He is fearful for their spiritual condition. If they are truly turning back to law, it raises the possibility that they were never truly converted, or at least are living in such contradiction that their walk becomes fruitless.
Philippians 2:16 (NKJV) – “...so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run in vain or labored in vain.”
This is not about losing salvation. It is about nullifying the purpose and power of the Gospel in their lives by adopting a system that renders grace ineffective (cf. Galatians 2:21).
Application: Two Paths
Paul places two roads before the Galatians, and before us:
Living under the law and the elemental principles of works-based religion, where effort, ritual, and external observances define our relationship to God.
Living as a son or daughter of God, fully accepted through faith in Christ, empowered by the Spirit, and motivated by love—not law.
To choose the first path is not only to deny grace, but to live in spiritual infancy, returning to ABCs after having received full adoption.
Illustration: John Wesley
Wesley’s life is a case study in this truth:
Before conversion, he was morally upright, devout, and tireless in religious works—yet spiritually dead.
He prayed, fasted, preached, studied, and observed both Sabbaths.
But later he testified: “I had even then the faith of a servant, though not that of a son.”
Only after trusting in Christ alone for salvation did he experience the joy of true adoption. This is precisely the issue Paul presses upon the Galatians.
Summary
Paul rebukes the Galatians for turning back to a system of legalism that mirrors their former pagan slavery.
The elemental principles of religion—law, ritual, calendar, and rule-keeping—are spiritually bankrupt.
True faith knows God and is known by Him, not because of observance but because of grace.
Paul warns that embracing such systems may render all Gospel preaching and discipling fruitless.
Each believer must decide whether they will live as sons with inheritance or servants in bondage.
2. (Galatians 4:13–16) Paul Appeals: “Remember How You Used to Respond to Me”
"You know that because of physical infirmity I preached the gospel to you at the first. And my trial which was in my flesh you did not despise or reject, but you received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. What then was the blessing you enjoyed? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?"
— Galatians 4:13–16, New King James Version
a. "You know that because of physical infirmity I preached the gospel to you at the first"
Paul here reminds the Galatians that his initial ministry among them was not pre-planned. It came about due to an unexpected circumstance—some type of physical ailment. Despite his affliction, Paul was compelled to preach the gospel, even in his weakness. The New Testament does not explicitly describe the nature of this infirmity, but based on context, several possibilities arise.
i. In Acts 14:19–20, Paul was stoned and left for dead in Lystra, a city in Galatia. Some scholars believe the aftereffects of that stoning may be what Paul refers to here. However, Paul’s wording in Galatians suggests that the infirmity is what brought him into Galatia in the first place, which implies the affliction preceded the stoning incident.
ii. Others believe this illness may have been some form of malaria, as suggested by his travel from the lowlands of Perga (a marshy, disease-prone region) to the higher elevation of Pisidian Antioch. William Barclay notes that the type of malaria prevalent in that region could feel like “a red-hot bar thrust through the forehead.”
iii. Regardless of the exact nature, the emphasis is that Paul’s bodily weakness was not a deterrent to the Galatians. Rather, it became a divine appointment for gospel proclamation. What men would consider a hindrance, God used as a strategic opportunity.
b. "My trial which was in my flesh you did not despise or reject"
The Galatians did not shrink back in disgust or disdain from Paul’s physical condition. Instead, they welcomed him with open arms, treating him as though he were an angelic messenger—or even Christ Himself. This response speaks volumes about the work of grace in their hearts at that time. Their love for Paul was deep and sacrificial.
i. Paul even says, "if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me." This may suggest that Paul's infirmity affected his eyesight—supporting the interpretation that his "thorn in the flesh" mentioned in 2 Corinthians 12:7–9 may have involved his eyes. This is further hinted at in Galatians 6:11, where Paul wrote, "See with what large letters I have written to you with my own hand!"
ii. Still, as Calvin wisely observes, the exact diagnosis remains speculative. What is clear is the Galatians’ love and honor for Paul, despite his evident weakness.
c. "Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?"
This rhetorical question cuts to the heart of pastoral ministry. Paul’s message had not changed, but their reception of it had. The Galatians had once revered him, even to the point of sacrificial affection, but now they viewed him with suspicion—all because he confronted their theological error.
i. Paul was not harsh out of self-interest or personal offense; he was zealous for their spiritual well-being. As Calvin notes, a pastor should not only be respected but also loved if his teaching is to take root. Paul had once experienced both from the Galatians. The estrangement now evident was not because Paul changed, but because their hearts had turned away from the truth.
ii. Paul’s experience is echoed in many faithful ministers’ lives. A man of God who speaks truth—even when it’s hard—is often met with resistance. But truth-telling is a mark of true friendship, not betrayal. Proverbs 27:6 affirms this principle: “Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.”
iii. Boice summarizes the principle well: the measure of a minister should not be his charisma, intellect, or appearance—but whether or not he is faithfully delivering the Word of God. That was Paul’s heart, and it should be the heart of every pastor.
3. (Galatians 4:17–18) Paul Appeals: “Beware of the Affection the Legalists Show You”
“They zealously court you, but for no good; yes, they want to exclude you, that you may be zealous for them. But it is good to be zealous in a good thing always, and not only when I am present with you.”
— Galatians 4:17–18, New King James Version
a. “They zealously court you, but for no good”
Paul acknowledges the legalists' pursuit of the Galatians. He doesn’t deny their zeal or passion—what he exposes is their motive. Their pursuit is not based on a genuine love for the Galatians or a godly concern for their souls, but on a manipulative agenda. They zealously court the Galatians, but not for anything good.
i. Legalism is often wrapped in a deceptive cloak of affection. Paul’s phrase mirrors a technique seen in cults and manipulative religious groups called “love bombing,” where the target is overwhelmed with attention and affection—not out of sincere care, but as a method of drawing them in.
ii. Christians, too, can fall into this pattern—offering emotional affirmation and exaggerated attention not out of Christlike love, but in an effort to win allegiance or loyalty to a theological faction, denomination, or group identity.
b. “Yes, they want to exclude you, that you may be zealous for them”
Paul uncovers the legalists’ ultimate strategy: exclusion and control. They do not aim to build up the body of Christ but to divide it. By alienating the Galatians from sound teachers like Paul and the freedom found in Christ, the legalists seek to create dependency. They want the Galatians to be zealous—not for Christ, but for them.
i. Legalism breeds spiritual elitism. It creates an “inner circle” mentality. The group itself becomes the focus, and spiritual status is gained by adherence to rules, rituals, or specific theological emphases—often masquerading as deeper spirituality or a return to “true Christianity.”
ii. This is religious captivity masked as holiness. Paul’s word “exclude” literally means “to lock up.” The Galatians were being drawn into bondage under the guise of spiritual growth.
iii. Wuest notes that the Judaizers started small—introducing observance of Jewish festivals and perhaps dietary customs. But now they were pressing toward circumcision—a full return to Mosaic Law as necessary for spiritual status. What began as subtle compromise was escalating toward complete doctrinal captivity.
c. “But it is good to be zealous in a good thing always”
Paul does not condemn zeal itself. Zeal can be holy and God-honoring when it is properly directed. What matters is the object and foundation of that zeal.
i. Paul once had zeal—an intense, burning zeal—but it was misguided. “As for zeal, persecuting the church…” he said in Philippians 3:6. That zeal, though sincere, was wrong because it was not based in truth. The same is true today—sincerity does not sanctify false doctrine.
ii. In Acts 7:58–8:4, Paul (then Saul) oversaw the execution of Stephen and launched persecution against the early church, believing he was serving God. Later, in 1 Timothy 1:15, he humbly confessed, “This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.” He had learned firsthand the danger of zeal without truth.
d. “And not only when I am present with you”
Paul desires the Galatians to maintain their zeal for the gospel whether or not he is physically with them. True spiritual maturity is marked by consistency—not dependent on personalities or presence, but on truth rooted in the Word of God.
4. (Galatians 4:19–20) Paul Appeals: “I Love You Like a Father — Please Listen to Me”
“My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you, I would like to be present with you now and to change my tone; for I have doubts about you.”
— Galatians 4:19–20, New King James Version
a. “My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you”
Paul speaks with fatherly tenderness and deep spiritual concern. He calls them “my little children”—a term of both endearment and spiritual responsibility. But the situation is so dire that Paul feels as if he is going through the pains of labor all over again—not for their initial salvation, but for their growth and maturity in Christ.
i. Paul’s ultimate goal is not loyalty to himself, but that Christ be formed in them. This aligns with Romans 8:29, which says, “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son.” Christian growth is not about conforming to a religious system, but becoming like Jesus Christ in character and purpose.
ii. The pain of watching them backslide into legalism caused Paul spiritual anguish. His pastoral labor felt like a second labor—unnatural, as it were. Normally a mother labors once. But here, Paul speaks as a spiritual mother experiencing repeated labor pains because the Galatians were spiritually regressing.
iii. Luther rightly notes that a faithful pastor is like a spiritual father or mother who delivers Christ to the people through the Word, through preaching, and through suffering.
b. “I would like to be present with you now and to change my tone”
Paul’s tone has been sharp—he has had to rebuke, warn, and challenge. But this is not what he desires. He longs to be with them in person, to change his tone, to speak gently once again as he did when he first shared the gospel with them. But their current state has made that impossible.
i. A faithful pastor does not enjoy rebuking his flock. A true shepherd desires restoration and joy, not confrontation. Paul is grieving as a father whose children are falling for deception and error.
c. “For I have doubts about you”
This statement is full of sorrow. Paul isn’t merely questioning their behavior—he’s alarmed by how quickly they’ve deserted the gospel of grace. Their legalistic turn calls into question whether Christ has truly been formed in them or whether they’ve merely embraced a form of religion without substance.
Summary: Pastoral Principles from Galatians 4:17–20
For the Congregation:
Do not measure a pastor by personality, appearance, or popularity, but by his faithfulness to the Word of God.
Be cautious of those who flatter you with zeal but aim to alienate you from sound doctrine.
Value pastors who love enough to speak the truth, even when it wounds temporarily.
For the Pastor:
Preach Christ, not yourself.
Be willing to suffer, labor, and even rebuke in love for the sake of spiritual maturity in your people.
Desire not mere excitement or emotionalism, but Christlikeness in your flock.
C. Using the Old Testament, Paul Shows That the Systems of Grace and Law Can’t Exist Together as Principles in Our Lives
1. (Galatians 4:21) Paul Will Appeal to the Law to Those Who Claim the Law
“Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?”
— Galatians 4:21, New King James Version
a. “Tell me, you who desire to be under the law”
Paul directly confronts those within the churches of Galatia who were not only promoting legalism but desiring to submit themselves under the bondage of the law. These were not simply misguided Christians — they were actively yearning for the Mosaic law to be the foundation of their walk with God.
i. Paul is addressing both false teachers and those deceived by them. There is a type of religious personality that prefers the structure of rule-keeping because it offers a false sense of control and human merit.
Under the law, one always has a tangible list to check off — rules, ceremonies, and standards to measure oneself and others by.
It fuels spiritual pride: “I keep these better than others, therefore I must be more holy.”
Ultimately, it gives the illusion that salvation can be earned, shifting glory from Christ to self.
ii. Paul contrasts this system with the grace found in Christ:
Under law: It is what you do for God that defines you.
Under grace: It is what God has done for you in Christ that saves and sanctifies.
“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”
— Ephesians 2:8–9, New King James Version
Under law: You strive in the flesh to keep commandments.
Under grace: You are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and enabled to walk in holiness as a result of being accepted in the Beloved.
iii. Charles Spurgeon illustrated this well:
“What is God’s law now? It is not above a Christian — it is under a Christian. Some men hold God’s law like a rod in terrorem, over Christians, and say, ‘If you sin you will be punished with it.’ It is not so. The law is under a Christian; it is for him to walk on, to be his guide, his rule, his pattern… Law is the road which guides us, not the rod which drives us, nor the spirit which actuates us.”
b. “Do you not hear the law?”
Paul now leads them into an exposition of the Old Testament itself. The irony is that those who were claiming to be champions of the law — the Judaizers — were mishandling and misapplying it. So Paul says in essence, “If you insist on the law, then let’s open it up and actually hear what it says.”
i. This is a powerful rebuke. Paul doesn’t reject Scripture — he embraces it rightly. The legalists promoted themselves as the “Bible believers,” but Paul shows they misunderstood the very Scriptures they claimed to honor.
ii. Paul refers them back to Genesis 16 and 21—the story of Hagar and Sarah, Ishmael and Isaac. He does not retell every detail but presumes the readers are familiar with the account. He expects Christians to know the Scriptures and see how the Old Testament points to the freedom found in Christ.
iii. This is not allegorizing Scripture in the liberal sense but typology in the Pauline, Spirit-inspired sense. Paul is showing that God has already established the contrast between the work of the flesh (law) and the work of promise (grace) from the very beginning.
2. (Galatians 4:22–23) The Old Testament Shows the Contrast Between the Two Sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael
“For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise.”
— Galatians 4:22–23, New King James Version
a. “For it is written that Abraham had two sons”
Paul begins by stating what every Jew knew — Abraham had two sons. But the legalists focused only on Isaac, ignoring that Ishmael was also a son of Abraham. Paul’s point is striking: not every child of Abraham is a child of the promise.
b. “The one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman”
The historical background is critical here:
Ishmael was born to Hagar, Sarah’s Egyptian maidservant, as a result of Abraham and Sarah’s human effort to “help” fulfill God’s promise when Sarah was barren.
Isaac was born to Sarah, Abraham’s true wife, in her old age — not by human effort, but by God’s miraculous intervention.
i. Paul draws the first contrast: bondage vs. freedom.
Hagar represents bondage — she was a slave, and her son Ishmael was born into that status.
Sarah represents liberty — she was a freewoman, and Isaac was born into promise and inheritance.
“Therefore, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.”
— Galatians 4:31, New King James Version
ii. This mirrors the spiritual truth: Legalism leads to bondage, but grace leads to liberty in Christ.
“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.”
— Galatians 5:1, New King James Version
c. “Born according to the flesh”
Ishmael’s birth was the result of human planning and striving. It was not the fulfillment of God’s promise, but the product of man’s impatience and carnal effort.
i. Legalism — like the birth of Ishmael — is driven by the flesh. It may look religious, but it denies the sufficiency of God’s promise and replaces it with man’s work.
“Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?”
— Galatians 3:3, New King James Version
ii. Wiersbe said it well:
“Legalism does not mean the setting of spiritual standards; it means worshipping these standards and thinking we are spiritual because we obey them.”
iii. Spurgeon added:
“The better legalist a man is, the more sure he is of being damned; the more holy a man is, if he trust to his works, the more he may rest assured of his own final rejection and eternal portion with Pharisees.”
d. “He of the freewoman through promise”
Isaac was the child of God’s faithfulness — not man’s fleshly effort. His birth was the result of divine intervention, a miraculous fulfillment of God’s Word to Abraham and Sarah.
“Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.”
— Genesis 18:14, New King James Version
i. This is Paul’s second contrast: promise vs. flesh. The real Christian life flows from the miracle of the new birth, the indwelling Spirit, and the promises of God — not from trying to obey rules in our own strength.
“For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.”
— Romans 4:13, New King James Version
3. (Galatians 4:24–27) The Old Testament Shows the Contrast Between Mount Sinai and Mount Zion
“Which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—
for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—
but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.
For it is written:
‘Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!
Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.’”
— Galatians 4:24–27, New King James Version
a. “Which things are symbolic”
Paul makes it clear that he is using an allegorical or typological illustration from the Old Testament to communicate a theological truth. The lives of Hagar and Sarah, and the births of Ishmael and Isaac, were real historical events — but they also symbolize deeper spiritual realities. Paul isn’t inventing symbolism; he is revealing how these events demonstrate the two ways people try to relate to God — either by law (works) or by grace (promise).
Yet we must be cautious. As Calvin warned:
“Scripture, they say, is fertile and thus bears multiple meanings. I acknowledge that Scripture is the most rich and inexhaustible fount of all wisdom. But I deny that its fertility consists in the various meanings which anyone may fasten to it at his pleasure. Let us know, then, that the true meaning of Scripture is the natural and simple one, and let us embrace and hold it resolutely.”
This is especially true in contrast to the allegorical methods of early church fathers like Origen. Paul, however, was Spirit-led and handled the text with precision.
b. “For these are the two covenants”
In biblical terms, a covenant is a binding contract — a set of terms by which a person relates to God. Paul presents two distinct and incompatible covenants. One covenant operates on the principle of law, and the other on the principle of grace.
The first covenant, represented by Hagar, is rooted in Mount Sinai, where the Law was given through Moses. This covenant is performance-based — it says, “You must do to be accepted.”
The second covenant, represented by Sarah, is rooted in promise — a supernatural work of God’s grace. It is not about what man can do for God, but what God has done for man through Christ.
c. “The one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar”
Paul shockingly links Mount Sinai — a sacred place for the Jews — to Hagar, the Egyptian slave woman. This would have been offensive to legalistic Jews, who prided themselves on descending from Isaac, not Ishmael. But Paul drives his point home: when you embrace the law as your means of justification, you are spiritually aligning yourself not with Sarah and Isaac, but with Hagar and Ishmael.
Mount Sinai represents law, which results in bondage — never freedom.
Hagar, who was never intended to bear the promised child, becomes a type of man’s fleshly effort to fulfill God’s promise on his own terms.
This covenant “gives birth to bondage” because law-keeping can never lead to liberty. It always enslaves, because it demands perfection that no man can attain.
“For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.”
— James 2:10, New King James Version
d. “Corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children”
Paul then connects this fleshly, law-based covenant to earthly Jerusalem — the religious center of Judaism at the time.
Earthly Jerusalem, though rich in religious tradition, was in spiritual bondage — full of those who outwardly followed the Law of Moses but inwardly rejected the Messiah.
These “children” of the law were born into a system of self-righteousness, ceremony, and legalism, but not into freedom.
This is Paul’s third major contrast: earthly efforts vs. heavenly calling, or Mount Sinai (law) vs. Mount Zion (grace).
e. “But the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all”
The second covenant is symbolized by Jerusalem above, also known as the New Jerusalem — the heavenly city described in Revelation 21.
“But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem…”
— Hebrews 12:22, New King James Version
This Jerusalem above is not tied to religious tradition or human effort, but to divine promise and grace. She is our mother in the sense that she gives spiritual birth to the true children of God — not through human striving, but through faith in Christ.
This covenant brings freedom, because Christ fulfilled the demands of the law.
This freedom is not libertinism; it is the ability to walk in righteousness without the chains of religious performance-based acceptance.
Every believer who is born again by the Spirit of God is a child of the heavenly Jerusalem, not of the earthly one.
f. “Rejoice, O barren…”
Paul quotes from Isaiah 54:1, where God prophetically encourages barren Israel to rejoice because she would soon be fruitful — not through natural means, but through divine promise.
“Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!
Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.”
— Isaiah 54:1, New King James Version
This is Paul’s fourth contrast: scarcity vs. abundance.
The law produced few true children, but the gospel produces many — a global family born not of race or ritual, but of faith.
g. The Overall Contrast — In Plain Terms
Paul presents a clear, divinely inspired contrast between legalism and grace, works and faith, and earthly religion vs. heavenly relationship. The comparison is not abstract — it’s personal. You’re either a spiritual descendant of Hagar or of Sarah:
The Ishmaels of the world — those who try to earn God's favor through their own effort — are slaves, spiritually speaking. Their “mother” is the earthly Jerusalem, and they are bound to performance, insecurity, and eventual rejection.
The Isaacs — those who trust God’s promise and believe on Jesus Christ — are free. Their “mother” is the heavenly Jerusalem, and they are born of a miracle and heirs of all that God has promised.
In summary:
Legalism is slavery; Christianity is freedom.
Legalism is born of the flesh; Christianity is born of the Spirit.
Legalism is connected to earthly religion; Christianity is connected to heaven.
Legalism has many children; Christianity has many more — born by grace through faith.
Legalism persecutes; Christianity endures.
Legalism inherits nothing; Christianity inherits everything.
Legalism relates to God through law-keeping; Christianity relates to God by trusting His promises.
4. (Galatians 4:28–31) Paul Applies the Contrasts Between the Two Systems
“Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.
But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now.
Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.’
So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.”
— Galatians 4:28–31, New King James Version
a. “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise”
Paul affirms the identity of the believer. Christians are not spiritual Ishmaels; we are spiritual Isaacs. We are not the product of man's fleshly attempt to fulfill God's plan — we are born of divine promise.
Isaac’s birth came not through human effort, but through faith in God's promise to Abraham and Sarah, despite their physical inability to produce a child.
In the same way, our salvation is not the result of works, but a supernatural work of God that fulfills His promise to justify those who believe.
“That the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”
— Galatians 3:14, New King James Version
This is the great declaration of the believer’s new identity: we are born of grace, not of law.
b. “But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now”
Paul draws another contrast — one rooted in conflict. The child born of the flesh, Ishmael, persecuted the child born of the Spirit, Isaac.
Genesis 21:9 records that “Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing.” This mockery — perhaps subtle, perhaps intense — was taken seriously by Sarah and ultimately by God.
Paul interprets this moment as a pattern: those born of the flesh will always oppose those born of the Spirit. That was true in Abraham’s household, it was true in Paul’s day among the Galatians, and it remains true today.
Legalists and those in bondage to law often mock, criticize, or try to suppress those who walk in the freedom of the Spirit.
As Dr. James Montgomery Boice wrote, “The greatest enemies of the believing church are found among the members of the unbelieving church.”
Paul isn’t describing attacks from atheists or pagans here. He’s talking about religious people — those who try to earn righteousness — persecuting true believers who rest in the righteousness of Christ alone.
This is the fifth contrast:
The legalist persecutes,
The believer in grace is the one persecuted.
c. “Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? ‘Cast out the bondwoman and her son’”
Paul settles the matter with Scripture itself — quoting directly from Genesis 21:10. Sarah demanded that Abraham send Hagar and Ishmael away, and God told Abraham to listen to Sarah’s voice, for her words were aligned with God’s plan.
In the spiritual sense, law and grace cannot coexist as systems of justification. Just as Hagar and Sarah could not live under the same roof, neither can the believer try to be justified by both works and faith. One has to go.
Grace demands that law be cast out as the basis of our standing before God. Not that the law is evil — the law is holy — but that it is not the path of salvation.
“For by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.”
— Galatians 2:16, New King James Version
This command to cast out the bondwoman and her son is not cruel — it is necessary. There can be no inheritance shared between those who rely on the law and those who rest in the promise.
d. “For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman”
Here is the sixth and final contrast in Paul’s illustration: inheritance.
Ishmael, though blessed in his own right (see Genesis 17:20), was not the heir of the covenant.
Isaac alone received the promise — and all those who are in Christ, the true Seed of Abraham, are co-heirs with Him (Galatians 3:29).
This is not about favoritism or moral superiority. Ishmael was not rejected because of a character flaw. He simply was not the child of promise — he was the child of human effort.
In the same way, those who rely on religious performance or law-keeping will inherit nothing. They are not heirs of the covenant. Only those who come by faith — those who are born of the Spirit — are heirs.
“And if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ…”
— Romans 8:17, New King James Version
e. “So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free”
Paul ends the section with a triumphant conclusion: we are children of the freewoman.
We are not born into bondage.
We are not under the weight of religious performance.
We are not living in fear of rejection from God if we fail to meet some manmade standard.
Instead, we are born into freedom. We are sons and daughters of God through the miraculous promise of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
“Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.”
— John 8:36, New King James Version
Paul knew the chains of legalism all too well. He had once been a Pharisee, bound in the system of works and traditions. But the Damascus road changed everything. Now, he stood as a living testimony that law brings bondage, but grace brings liberty.
