Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 3:23 - 3:23
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Gal_3:23. Δέ ] no longer connected with ἀλλά (Hofmann), but leading over to a new portion of the statement (the counterpart to which is to follow in Gal_3:25),—namely, to the position which the law held under the circumstances expressed in Gal_3:25. Before the introduction of faith, it was to guard and maintain those who belonged to it in this relation of bondage, so that they should not get rid of it and become free,—a liberation which was reserved for the faith which was to come.
πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν ] δέ in the third place with the prepositional phrase. See Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 397; Klotz, ad Devar. II. p. 378 f.
Here also πίστις is neither doctrina fidem postulans, the gospel, as most ancient expositors and Schott think, nor the dispensation of faith (Buhl, comp. Rückert), but subjective faith, which is treated objectively. Comp. on Gal_1:23, Gal_3:2. As long as there was not yet any belief in Christ, faith was not yet present; but when on the preaching of the gospel men believed in Christ, the faith, which was previously wanting, had come, that is, had now set in, had presented itself,—namely, in the hearts of those who had become believers. On ἐλθεῖν as applied to mental things and states, which set in, comp. Pind. Nem. i. 48 (hopes); Plat. Pol. iii. p. 402 A (understanding); Soph. O. R. 681 ( δόκησις ). Comp. also Rom_7:9.
ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι ] (see the critical notes): under the law we were held in custody, so that we were placed in ward with a view to the faith about to be revealed. The. subject is: we Jewish Christians (Gal_3:25); the emphasis is on ὑπὸ νόμον , and afterwards on πίστιν . The law is represented as a ruler, under whose dominion ( ὑπὸ νόμον ) those who belonged to it were held in moral captivity, as in a prison; so that they, as persons shut up in the φρουρά under lock and key, were placed beyond the possibility of liberation—which was only to ensue by means of the faith that was to be revealed in the future.[166] The words and the context do not yield more than this: the paedagogic efficacy of the law is not inferred till Gal_3:24, and is not to be anticipated here. This view is opposed to that of many expositors (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Erasmus, Grotius, Estius, Winer, Rückert, Schott, Ewald, and others), who find already expressed here that paedagogic function, which, however, is understood in the sense of the “usus politicus” of the law (but see on Gal_3:24): “in severam legis disciplinam, quae ne in omnem libidinem effunderemur cavit, traditi,” Winer. But the whole explanation of the law guarding from sin (to which also Wieseler refers ἐφρουρ .) is opposed to the correct interpretation of ΤῶΝ ΠΑΡΑΒΆΣΕΩΝ ΧΆΡΙΝ (Gal_3:19), and also to Gal_3:22. The captivity so forcibly described by Paul is just the sinful bondage under the law, Rom_7:1; 1Co_15:56. Observe, moreover, in order to a just understanding of the passage, that ὑπὸ νόμον , according to the very position of the words, cannot without proceeding arbitrarily be connected with ΣΥΓΚΛ . (so de Wette, Wieseler, and many others, also my own former interpretation),—a connection which is not warranted by the other thought, Gal_3:22,—but must be joined to ἘΦΡΟΥΡ . (Augustine and many others, also Hofmann, Reithmayr, Buhl); and further, that the present participle ΣΥΓΚΛΕΙΌΜΕΝΟΙ (with the ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ΜΈΛΛ . Κ . Τ . Λ . belonging to it) forms the modal definition of ἐφρουρούμεθα , representing the continued operation of the latter, which, constantly appearing in fresh acts, renders liberation impossible. Hofmann (comp. his Schriftbew. II. 2, p. 59) understands συγκλείειν εἰς in the sense of constraining to something; it expresses in his view the constraining power, with which subjection to the law served to keep the people directed towards the faith which was to be revealed in the future.[167] Such an use of the phrase is indubitably found among later Greek authors, and is especially frequent in Polybius (see Raphel, and Schweighäuser, Lex. Polyb. p. 571 f.); but how improbable, and in fact incredible it is, that Paul should have here used this word in a different sense from that in which he used it immediately before in Gal_3:22, and in the kindred passage, Rom_11:32 (he has it not elsewhere)! This sense could not have occurred to any reader. Besides, the idea of constraint against one’s will, which must be conveyed in συγκλειόμ . εἰς (see Fritzsche, ad Rom. II. p. 545), and which Hofmann obliterates (“the law conferred on the people its distinctive position, and its abiding in this distinctive position was at the same time an abiding directed towards the faith that was to come”), would neither agree with the text (Gal_3:22; Gal_3:24) nor harmonize with history (Romans 11; Act_28:25 ff.).
εἰς τὴν μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ] As εἰς in Gal_3:24 is evidently to be understood as telic, and as the temporal interpretation usque ad (Erasmus, Grotius, Michaelis, Koppe, Morus, Rosenmüller, Rückert, Usteri, and others) after πρὸ τοῦ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν , which includes in itself the terminus ad quem, would be very unmeaning, εἰς is to be explained: towards the faith, that is, with the design, that we should pass over into the state of faith. Luther (1519) aptly remarks: “in hoc, ut fide futura liberaremur.” In accordance with the view of Oecumenius, Theophylact, Augustine, Calovius, Raphel, Bengel, Hofmann, εἰς κ . τ . λ . is to be connected with συγκλειόμενοι , because the latter, without this annexation of the telic statement εἰς κ . τ . λ ., would not form a characteristic modal definition of ἐφρουρ . This εἰς κ . τ . λ . is, in the history of salvation, the divine aim of that σύγκλεισις , which was to cease on its attainment; Christ is the end of the law. Comp. Gal_3:22, where ἵνα κ . τ . λ . corresponds with the εἰς κ . τ . λ . here.
μέλλουσαν ] is placed first (Paul did not write, εἰς τ . πίστ . τ . μέλλ . ἀποκ .), because with that earlier situation is contrasted the subsequent future state of things which was throughout the object of its aim. Comp. on Rom_8:18. Similarly in 1Pe_5:1, 2Ma_8:11.
ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ] for so long as there was not yet belief in Christ, faith had not yet made its appearance: it was still a (in the counsel of God) hidden element of life, which became revealed as a historical phenomenon, when Christ had come and the gospel—the preaching of faith (Gal_3:2; Gal_3:5)—was made known. Ἀποκαλ . cannot be understood as the infinitive of design and, according to the reading συγκεκλεισμένοι , as belonging to the latter word (Matthias: “in order to become manifest, as those who were under the ban with a view to the future faith”), because in the religious-historical connection of the text it must signify the final appearance of the blessing of salvation, which hitherto as a μυστήριον had been unknown (Rom_16:25). Besides, Paul would thus have written very far from clearly; he must at least have placed the infinitive before συγκεκλεισ .
[166] If, with Winer, Usteri, and Schott, ἐφρουρ . is explained merely as asservabamur (1Pe_1:5),—comp. Hofmann, “we were held in keeping,”—it yields, according to the connection with συγκεκλεισμένοι , and with the inference thereupon of the paedagogic function of the law, too weak a thought. Comp. Wis_17:16. Luther, Calvin, and many others, including Rückert and de Wette, have rightly found in ἐφρουρ . and συγκεκλ . the figurative idea of a prison ( φρούριον , Plat. Ax. p. 365 E; φρουρά , Plat. Phaed. p. 62 ff.). The prison, however, is not the law itself; but the latter is the ruler, under whose power the captives are in prison,—because, namely, under the law, as the δύναμις τῆς ἁμαρτίας (1Co_15:56), they are not in a position to attain to the freedom of moral life.
[167] Raphel, Polyb. p. 518, has understood συγκλείειν εἰς in a similar way to Hofmann, and finely paraphrased it: “eo necessitatis quem adigere, ut ad fidem tanquam sacram ancoram confugere cogatur.” Comp. Bengel.