Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 3
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
ἐν ὑμῖν ] is wanting in A B C à , min., and several vss. and Fathers, and is omitted by Lachm. But not being required, and not understood, how easily might it be passed over! There was no reason in the text for attaching it as a gloss, least of all to κατʼ ὀφθαλμοὺς προεγρ . (as conjectured by Schott), for these words were in fact perfectly clear by themselves. Justly defended also by Reiche.
Gal_3:8. ἐνευλογηθήσονται ] Elz. gives εὐλογ ., against decisive testimony. In Act_3:25 also, ἐνευλογ . is exchanged in several authorities for the usual simple form.
Gal_3:10. According to decisive evidence, ὅτι is to be adopted (with Griesb., Lachm., Scholz, and Tisch.) before ἐπικατάρατος .
Gal_3:12. After αὐτά Elz. has ἄνθρωπος , against decisive testimony. Addition from the LXX., Lev_18:5; Rom_10:5.
Gal_3:13. Instead of γέγρ . γάρ , read, on preponderating testimony, with Lachm. and Tisch., ὅτι γέγραπται approved by Griesb. The former arose from Gal_3:10.
Gal_3:17. After Θεοῦ , Elz., Scholz, Reiche, have εἰς Χριστόν , in opposition to A B C à , min., several vss. and Fathers. Added as a gloss, in order, after Gal_3:16, to make it evident from Gal_3:24 what covenant is intended, although this is obvious from the context, and the addition was therefore by no means necessary (as maintained by Ewald and Wieseler). In the sequel, ἔτη is (with Griesb., Lachm., Scholz, Tisch.) to be placed after the number, according to decisive evidence.
Gal_3:19. προσετέθη ] Griesb. and Scholz (following Mill and Bengel) read ἐτέθη . Not sufficiently attested by D* F G and a few min., vss., and Fathers; and the compound verb appeared to conflict with Gal_3:15.
Instead of ᾧ ἐπήγγελται , only L and many min., along with some Fathers, read ὅ ἐπήγγ . A reading arising from the fact that ᾧ was not understood.
Gal_3:21. τοῦ Θεοῦ ] is wanting only in B, Clar. Germ. Ambrosiast. (bracketed by Lachm.), and is therefore so decisively attested that it cannot be regarded as an explanatory addition. The self-evident meaning and the previous reference without τοῦ Θεοῦ (see Gal_3:16 ff.) led to the omission.
Gal_3:21. ἂν ἐκ νόμου ἦν ] Many variations. F G have merely ἐκ νόμου ;[111] D*, Damasc., ἐκ νόμου ἦν ; A B C, Cyr., ἐκ νόμου (B, ἐν νόμῳ ) ἂν ἦν . In default of internal evidence, the latter is, with Lachm., Tisch., Schott, to be preferred as the best attested (comp. à , ἐκ νόμου ἦν ἄν ). The omission of ἄν arose from the ἦν following, just as easily as the omission of ἦν from the following ἡ . The Recepta is to be considered as the restoration of the original ἌΝ in a wrong place.
Gal_3:23. ΣΥΓΚΕΚΛΕΙΣΜΈΝΟΙ ] A B D* F G à , 31, Clem, (once) Cyr. Damasc. read ΣΥΓΚΛΕΙΟΜΈΝΟΙ . Recommended by Griesb., adopted by Lachm., Scholz, Schott. The Recepta, specially defended by Reiche, is an ancient emendation of the not-understood present participle.
Gal_3:28. εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ] A has low ἐστε Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ ; and à , ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰ . But εἷς was very easily suppressed by the preceding ὑμεῖς , and then ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ was altered in accordance with the beginning of Gal_3:29. The reading ἕν instead of εἷς in F G and several vss., also Vulgate, It., and Fathers, is an interpretation.
Gal_3:29. καί ] is wanting in A B C D E à , 89**, and a few vss. and many Fathers, and is expunged by Lachmann, Tisch., and Schott; justly, because it was inserted for the purpose of connection.
[111] Which Buttmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1858, p. 488, considers as probably the original reading.
CONTENTS.
Paul now begins to unfold to his readers that righteousness comes not from the law, but from faith. With this view, after having expressed censure and surprise, he refers in the first place to their own experience, namely, to their reception of the Holy Spirit (Gal_3:1-5). He then passes on to Abraham, who had been justified by faith, and of whom believers were the sons who, in conformity with Scripture, were to enjoy with Abraham the blessing announced to him (Gal_3:6-9). For those that trust in works of the law are cursed, and by the law can no man be justified (Gal_3:10-12). It is Christ who by His atoning death has freed us from the curse of the law, in order that this blessing should reach the Gentiles through Christ, and the promised Holy Spirit should be received through faith (Gal_3:13-14). But the covenant of promise concluded with Abraham, which moreover applied not merely to Abraham, but also to Christ, cannot be abrogated by the law which arose long after (Gal_3:15-18). This leads the apostle to the question as to the destination of the law, which he briefly answers in Gal_3:19 positively, and then in Gal_3:20-23 negatively, to the effect that the law is not opposed to the promises. Before the period of faith, the law had the office of a παιδαγωγός in reference to Christ; but after the appearance of faith this relation came to an end, for faith brought believers to the sonship of God, because by baptism fellowship with Christ was established, and thereupon all distinctions apart from Christ vanished away (Gal_3:23-28). And this fellowship with Christ includes the being children of Abraham and heirs of the promises.