Galatians 4:24

δύο διαθῆκαι אcABCD etc. αἱ is prefixed in Text. Rec. with א*.

24. ἅτινά, “now this class of things,” Colossians 2:23 note.

ἐστιν�[133], “are written with another meaning.” For the thought cf. 1 Corinthians 10:11. For the word compare Chrysostom οὐ τοῦτο δὲ μόνον παραδηλοῖ, ὄπερ φαίνεται, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἅλλα τινὰ�· διὸ καὶ�.

[133] Is affixed it means that all the passages are mentioned where the word occurs in the Greek Bible.

St Paul does not deny the literal truth of the narratives, but says that besides their literal meaning they have another. He probably would not have restricted himself to the existence of only one other meaning, if others could fairly be deduced from the narratives.
Philo, who himself professes to retain also the literal sense (e.g. On Abraham, cc. 15 (§ 68), 20 (§ 99), 24 (§ 119), 29 (§ 147)), is the great example preserved to us of a commentator who continually sees inner, in his case philosophical, meanings in Scripture, but the tendency is universal, and the method is in fact legitimate if the inner meanings are deduced from principles underlying the narratives. Rabbinic, as well as Philonic, expositions go far beyond these, deducing, by an exaggerated belief in the inspiration of every word and letter, meanings which the words, or even letters, may have in other contexts and combinations. In our passage St Paul chiefly deduces his meaning from principles; if he does from words it is but slightly.

Theodore, against Alexandrian allegorists, insists strongly on the primary sense of Scripture: “apostolus enim non interimit historiam, neque evolvit res dudum factas; sed sic posuit illa ut tunc fuerant facta, et historiam illorum quae fuerunt facta ad suum usus est intellectum.” So Theodoret οὐ γὰρ τὴν ἱστορίαν�, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἐν τῇ ἱστορίᾳ προτυπωθέντα διδάσκει.

For Philo’s interpretation of the incident of Hagar see Ryle in Hastings’ Dict. Bible II. 278b; also Lightfoot, pp. 195 sqq.

αὗται γάρ εἰσιν, “These two women are” etc. But possibly αὗται = ταῦτα, attracted into the gender of διαθῆκαι, and so Win.-Schm. § 23. 5 a, comparing Matthew 7:12 al.

δύο διαθῆκαι. See notes on Textual Criticism. The absence of the article in the true text emphasises the fact that the women do represent “dispositions” (testaments, see note on Galatians 3:15), and indeed two. It should be noted that this is the first time in this Epistle that St Paul has called the Christian dispensation a διαθήκη (cf. 2 Corinthians 3:6; 2 Corinthians 3:14). Previously he distinguished the διαθήκη or διαθῆκαι from the ἐπαγγελία or ἐπαγγελίαι. The corrector, however, who added αἱ was accustomed to regard the two dispensations as two διαθῆκαι, gaining his knowledge in reality from this passage.

μία μὲν. The second is not expressly mentioned, but is taken up in ἡ δὲ ἄνω Ἰερονσαλὴμ, Galatians 4:26. Cf. Win.-Schm. § 26. 7.

ἀπὸ ὂρους Σινά. Given forth from Mt Sinai, ἐκ (Galatians 4:23) would have attributed too much originating power to the place itself. It is better to retain the comma after Σινά.

εἰς δουλείαν. He cannot say that the διαθήκη at Mt Sinai was a slave (as exactness of verbal parallelism requires), but slavery is the result of being its offspring. It is probably accidental that in the metaphor the status of the child is determined by that of the mother rather than the father. This was not the custom of either the Arabs or the Hebrews, but it was of the Greeks and Romans. The Galatians, wherever they lived, would, as a non-Semitic race, probably also have had the same custom.

γεννῶσα, “bearing children unto bondage,” R.V. Of the mother, Luke 1:13 al.

ἥτις ἐστὶν Ἅγαρ, “which is Hagar.”

(a) It is probable that in this passage ἥτις has practically lost its classical distinction from ἥ, and is merely explanatory as in Luke 2:4; Luke 8:26; Luke 9:30; Luke 12:1; Acts 16:12. See Win.-Schm. § 24. 14. Moulton, Proleg., 1906, pp. 91, 92, while arguing for the existence of the distinction, is inclined to admit that it may have “worn rather thin.”

(b) The usual explanation is “inasmuch as it is Hagar.” The first covenant bears children to bondage, and therefore fairly corresponds to Hagar.