Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Galatians 4:26 - 4:26
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Gal_4:26. But altogether different from the position of the present Jerusalem is that of the upper Jerusalem, which is free; and this upper Jerusalem is our mother.
δέ ] places the ἄνω Ἱερουσ . in contrast with the previous τῇ νῦν Ἱερουσ . The μία μέν of Gal_4:24 has been left, in consequence of the digression occasioned by the remarks made in Gal_4:25, without any correlative to follow it (such as ἡ δὲ ἑτέρα ),—an omission which is quite in harmony with the rapid movement of Pauline thought. Comp. Rom_7:12, et al.; also Rom_5:12. He leaves it to the reader to form for himself the second part of the allegorical interpretation after the similarity of the first, and only adduces so much of it as is directly suggested by the contrast of the just characterized τῇ νῦν Ἱερουσ . He leaves it, therefore, to the reader to supply the following thought: “But the other covenant, which is allegorically represented in this history, is the covenant instituted by Christ, which brings forth to freedom: this is Sarah, who is of the same nature with the upper Jerusalem; for the latter is, as Sarah was, free with its children, and to this upper Jerusalem we Christians as children belong.”
ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἱερουσαλήμ ] is neither the ancient Jerusalem, the Salem of Melchizedek (Oeder, Michaelis, Paulus), nor Mount Zion, which is called in Josephus ἡ ἄνω πόλις (see the passages in Ottii Spicil. ex Josepho, p. 400 f.), as among the Greeks the Acropolis at Athens was also so named (Vitringa, Elsner, Mill, Wolf, Rambach, Moldenhauer, Zachariae). Both interpretations are opposed to the context, and the former to linguistic usage.[220] The contrast between heaven and earth elsewhere conveyed by ἄνω , as used by Paul (Php_3:14; Col_3:2), is found here also, since Ἡ ΝῦΝ ἹΕΡ . is the earthly Jerusalem. It is true that this contrast would have been more accurately expressed if, instead of τῇ νῦν Ἱερουσ ., he had written Τῇ ΚΆΤΩ ἹΕΡΟΥΣ . ( éøåùìéí ùì îèä ); but in using the ΝῦΝ he thought of the future Jerusalem as its contrast (Heb_13:14), and afterwards changed his mode of representation, by conceiving the future as the upper: for it is the heavenly Jerusalem, called by the Rabbins éøåùìéí ùì îòìä , which, according to Jewish teaching, is the archetype in heaven of the earthly Jerusalem, and on the establishment of the Messiah’s kingdom is let down to earth, in order to be the centre and capital of the Messianic theocracy, just as the earthly Jerusalem was the centre and capital of the ancient theocracy. Comp. Heb_11:10; Heb_12:22; Heb_13:14; Rev_3:12; Rev_21:2. See generally Schoettgen, de Hieros. coelest. in his Horae, p. 1205 ff.; Meuschen, N.T. ex Talm. ill. p. 199 ff.; Wetstein, in loc.; Bertholdt, Christol. p. 211 ff.; Ewald, ad Apoc. p. 11, 307. And as previously the present Jerusalem represented the Jewish divine commonwealth, so here the upper Jerusalem represents the Messianic theocracy, which before the παρουσία is the church, and after the ΠΑΡΟΥΣΊΑ is the glorious kingdom of the Messiah. With justice, accordingly, the church on earth (not merely the “ecclesia triumphans”) has at all times been deemed included in the heavenly Jerusalem (see Luther, and especially Calovius, in loc.); for the latter is, in relation to the church, its πολίτευμα , which is in heaven (Php_3:20). The heavenly completion of the church in Christ ensues at the παρουσία , in which Christ who rules in heaven will manifest in glory the life—hitherto hidden with Him in God (see on Col_3:3 f.)—of the community, which is the body and πλήρωμα of Him its Head (Eph_1:22 f.). Thus the church on earth is already the theocracy of the heavenly Jerusalem, and has its πολίτευμα in heaven; but this its κληρονομία is, until the παρουσία , only an ideal and veiled, although in hope assured, possession, which at the second coming of the Lord at length attains objective and glorious realization. It is, however, by no means to be asserted that Paul entertained the sensuous Rabbinical conceptions of the heavenly Jerusalem (see Eisenmenger, entdeckt. Judenth. II. p. 839 ff.); for he nowhere presents, or even so much as hints, at them, often as he speaks of the παρουσία and the consequences connected with it. In his view, the heavenly Jerusalem was the national setting for the idea—founded on the exalted Christ as its central point—of the kingdom of the Messiah before and after its glorious realization.
ἐλευθέρα ἐστιν ] that is, independent of the Mosaic law (opposite of the δουλεύει in Gal_4:25), in free, moral self-determination, under the higher life-principle of the Spirit (Rom_8:2; 2Co_3:17).
ἥτις ἐστὶ μήτηρ ἡμῶν ] correlative with the above-mentioned μετὰ τῶν τέκν . αὐτῆς ; hence, if Paul had wished to lay the stress upon ἡμῶν (Winer, Matthias), he must have made this evident by the marked position ἥτις ἡμῶν μήτ . ἐ . The emphasis lies rather on ἥτις , that is, she who, etc. (comp. on Gal_4:24), quippe quae libera Hierosol. To this Jerusalem as our ΠΟΛΊΤΕΥΜΑ we Christians belong, as children to their mother (Php_3:20; Eph_2:19). In bondage, it would not be our mother. Hofmann interprets differently: “the freedom of this Jerusalem may be seen in her children.” But this would be a correlative retrospective conclusion, since Paul has neither written ὅτι (but ἥτις ), nor has he expressed himself participially οὖσα μήτ . ἡμ . μήτηρ without the article is qualitative. That ἩΜῶΝ applies to the Christians generally, including also the Gentile Christians, is obvious of itself from the context, and does not require the addition of πάντων in the Textus receptus, which is defended by Ewald (in opposition to Reiche), to make it evident.
[220] ἄνω always means above. When it appears to mean olim, it denotes the ascending line of ancestry, as e.g. in Plat. Legg. ix. p. 880 B: ἢ πατρὶ ἢ ἔτι ἀνωτέρω . Theact. p. 175 B al.; the earlier time lying behind being regarded as higher (Polyb. v. 6. 1, iv. 2. 3, iv. 50. 3).