Gálatas 4:30

DISCOURSE: 2076
JUSTIFICATION FAITH MAINTAINED

Gálatas 4:30. Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond-woman and her sun: for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman.

THE whole of God’s blessed word is highly instructive; and the Old Testament is an excellent preparative for the New. Indeed, those who are at all conversant with Scripture, expect to find mysteries in the ceremonial law, because that is confessedly a shadow of good things to come: but few are aware how much is to be found in the historical parts of the Old Testament. We are, however, in no danger of erring, if we say that the sacrifice which Abel offered was not a mere accidental difference from that of Cain; but a typical exhibition of the sacrifice of Christ, to which, by faith, the pious offerer had respect [Note: Hebreus 11:4.]. The preservation of Noah from the deluge, too, was not a mere mercy vouchsafed to himself and family; but a type of the benefit which we receive by baptism, which, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, saves us, (on a supposition we have received it aright,) as the ark, by its buoyancy, saved him from destruction by the tempestuous billows [Note: 1 Pedro 3:20.]. In my text, there is reference to what we might have supposed to be an accidental disagreement in Abraham’s family. We might naturally suppose that a wife and a concubine would not agree very well, and that their children would prove a source of mutual animosity. And so it turned out. But was this a mere accidental circumstance? No: it was permitted of God, in order to afford a good occasion for illustrating the covenant of grace, and the exclusive blessedness of those who adhered to it. You will perceive, that, in my text the words of Hagar are cited as a general rule of procedure in reference to the souls of men at the last day: and as they are somewhat intricate, and have at the same time an appearance of harshness and severity, I will endeavour to explain and vindicate the declaration contained in them.

Here is evidently a sentence denounced: and my endeavour shall be,

I. To explain the sentence—

To understand it aright, we must consider what was the subject in dispute between the Apostle and his opponents.
Some Judaizing teachers had drawn away his Galatian converts from the pure Gospel which he had taught them, to an affiance in the ceremonial law. And, to bring them back to the truth of Christ, he shewed them, throughout this whole epistle, that salvation is by faith alone; and that to attempt to build our hopes in any measure on the law of works, was to “pervert the Gospel,” and, in fact, to introduce “another Gospel [Note: Gálatas 1:6.].” In confirmation of this sentiment, he proves, at large, that salvation is by faith only: he proves it, I say,

1. In a way of argumentative discussion—

[In the beginning of the preceding chapter, after reminding them that through the preaching of faith, and not by any works of the law, they had obtained the miraculous influences of the Holy Spirit [Note: Gálatas 3:2; Gálatas 3:5.], he reminds them of the way in which Abraham was justified. This was by faith, as the Gospel preached to Abraham had foretold, in relation both to himself and all his spiritual seed: and, consequently, we must be saved in the same way as he [Note: Gálatas 3:6. All the verses quoted from this chapter and the next should be cited at length.] — — — He then proves the same from the very terms in which the Law and the Gospel are promulgated; the one requiring obedience, and the other faith; the one killing, and the other giving life [Note: Gálatas 3:10.] — — — He next adduces the end for which Christ came into the world. This was not to give men an opportunity of saving themselves by the law; but to redeem them, by his own death, from the curses of the law; and to open a way for the blessing which had been promised to Abraham to descend upon them through the exercise of faith [Note: Gálatas 3:13.] — — — From thence he leads them to the contemplation of the covenant in which all the blessings of salvation were contained. This covenant had been made with Abraham, four hundred and thirty years before the law was given to Moses; and in it, all the believing seed of Abraham were interested. Now, this covenant could never be annulled, except by the consent of all the parties contained in it. But a very small part of those who were interested in that covenant were present when the law was given. That was only given to Abraham’s children after the flesh: his spiritual children had nothing to do with it: and therefore to them is the covenant of grace as valid as ever; the publication of the law having made no difference in it whatever [Note: Gálatas 3:15.] — — — Here, supposing naturally that his opponent would ask, “Of what use then the law was?” he proceeds to shew, that it was not given in order to establish any thing in opposition to the Gospel, but to operate in subserviency to the Gospel; shewing men their need of it; and, like a schoolmaster, disciplining them for the grateful reception of it [Note: Gálatas 3:19.] — — — and, consequently, now that the Gospel was fully revealed they should adhere to it, and look for acceptance solely by faith in it [Note: Gálatas 3:25.] — — —

Here another question would arise. If the law was given to the Jews from the time of Moses, in what state were those Jews? Were they under the covenant of grace, or under the covenant of works? This he answers, by shewing that they were, in fact, under the covenant of grace; but yet, that they were like minors, who, whilst they are under age, differ but little from servants; not having any further enjoyment of their inheritance than their tutors and governors judged expedient for them. The time, however, being now come for them to enter on their possessions without restraint, he exhorts them to avail themselves of their liberty, and to walk no more as servants under bondage; but as sons and heirs, at perfect liberty [Note: ver. 1–7.] — — —

Thus he has made it appear, that to live under bondage to the law, is to abandon our dearest privileges, and to violate our most solemn duties.
He now proceeds, after some suitable admonitions, to establish the same truth,]

2. In a way of allegorical illustration—

[In the history to which the Apostle refers, we should not, I confess, have seen any confirmation of the doctrine before us, if one who was inspired of God himself had not explained it to us. The transaction was this: Sarah, Abraham’s wife, saw Ishmael, who was Abraham’s son by Hagar, mocking her son Isaac. I apprehend that Ishmael derided Isaac, the younger son, for presuming to assert his title to his father’s inheritance, in preference to him, who was the elder. Sarah, indignant at this behaviour, desired Abraham to expel Hagar and her son from his presence; saying, “Cast out the bond-woman and her son; for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.” This was exceedingly grievous to Abraham, who felt a paternal love for Ishmael, and knew not how to part with him: but God himself confirmed the word that had been spoken; and enjoined Abraham to comply with his wife’s request, since it was his determination that “in Isaac should Abraham’s seed be called [Note: Gênesis 21:9.].”

Now, in my text, we are told, that under this domestic occurrence a great mystery was veiled; for that it represented the distinction which, should, to all eternity, be made between those who cleaved to the covenant of works, and those who should lay hold on the covenant of grace. Hagar, a bond-woman, represented the legal covenant which should in due time be made on Mount Sinai; as her son Ishmael did the persons who should adhere to it: whereas Sarah, the married wife, represented the covenant of grace which had already been made with Abraham; and her son Isaac, the persons who should obtain an interest in that. Now, all persons, by nature, live under the covenant of works: but divine grace, where it operates, brings men under the covenant of grace: but all the former will be cast out from God; and the latter only will be partakers of his inheritance: and this distinction, we are told, was intended to be marked in the foregoing history. It may appear hard that such a distinction should ever be made: but made it shall be; God having declared this to be his sovereign will, his irrevocable decree: “Cast out the bond-woman and her son; for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman [Note: ver. 21–31.].”

Shall it be said, that this is too figurative and too recondite to add any weight to the preceding argument? I answer: This very circumstance, of its being so figurative and so recondite, gives it, in my mind, even greater weight than if it had been more plain and obvious; because it shews the unspeakable importance of that truth which it is brought to confirm. Had not the doctrine of justification by faith alone been of prime and indispensable necessity to every child of man, the Apostle would have been satisfied with establishing it by the train of argument which he has pursued: but, feeling that the rejection of it would prove fatal to the soul, he would omit nothing that could contribute to the enforcing of it on men’s consciences, or the impressing of it on their minds.]
Aware, however, that, in the opinion of many, there are strong objections to this doctrine, I will proceed,

II.

To vindicate it—

Against the very act itself, which is referred to in my text, we should have been rather disposed to object, if it had not been approved by God himself: we should have thought Abraham would have been better employed in pacifying the rage of Sarah, than in lending himself as an instrument to give it energy and effect. We should have thought it more worthy of him to use his influence for the purpose of allaying domestic feuds, than to exert his authority for the rendering of them irreconcileable and eternal. But God commanded it; and therefore it must, of necessity, have been right, whether we can explain the reasons of it or not. And the doctrine which it was intended to shadow forth is right, whether we can understand it or not. To exclude from salvation all who adhere to the covenant of works, and to save those only who lay hold on the covenant of grace, may appear unjust, severe, and partial: but we will undertake to vindicate it from all that can be said against it, even from every charge,

1. Of injustice—

[If it had pleased God to deal with fallen man precisely as He had dealt with fallen angels, what injustice would he have done to any? Wherein did we merit an interposition in our favour more than they? Why, when we had violated the old covenant, should he enter into a new covenant, whereby we might be restored to his favour? Why, in order to render this measure consistent with his glorious perfections, should he give us his only-begotten Son to bear our sins, and to effect a reconciliation for us through the blood of his cross? Could we claim any such mercy at his hands? Or, could any one have had reason to complain, if no such mercy bad been ever manifested? What injustice, then, can be done to any one, by confining mercy to this particular channel; and by requiring this new covenant in Christ Jesus to be made our hope and our plea, in order to our participation of its benefits? If we neither had, nor could have, any claim for mercy at all, we certainly can have no ground for complaint against God, for offering it in a way honourable to himself; and not granting it in a way of our own, that would reflect dishonour on every one of his perfections.]

2. Of severity—

[Though the shutting up of mankind to one only way of salvation may not be altogether unjust, yet it may be deemed somewhat unmerciful and severe; because it makes the rejection of that salvation a fresh ground of offence, and involves the offender in deeper guilt and misery than he could otherwise have incurred. But there is no undue severity in this. Let us suppose that God had acted towards the fallen angels as he has towards us. Let us suppose that he had sent his only dear Son to bear their punishment in his own person, and to work out a righteousness whereby they might be justified: and that he had offered to restore to his favour very soul among them who would accept it in his Son’s name; but would account all who should reject this overture as having added pride and ingratitude to all their other sins, and make them answerable for this their augmented guilt: is there one of us that would conceive God to be acting with severity towards them? Is there one who would not regard this as a stupendous effort of love and mercy, and acknowledge, that all who should despise this proffered mercy would deserve their appointed doom?

But there is another evil, which the despisers of the new covenant are guilty of: they invariably “mock” and deride those who found all their hopes upon it. They may not, indeed, be open scoffers, like Ishmael; but in their hearts they do of necessity “mock at the counsel of the poor, who putteth his trust in God [Note: Salmos 14:1.].” At this hour, as well as in the Apostle’s days, it may be said, “As, then, he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.” How then can it be supposed that these contemners of God’s people should be made heirs together with them? or, what severity can there be in refusing to them a portion which they so wantonly despise? The sentence, as denounced by Sarah, might have been deemed severe; but, as inflicted by the Most. High God, it is merited in its full extent: for not even Satan himself was ever guilty of rejecting a Saviour, and pouring contempt on redeeming love.]

3. Of partiality—

[It is not persons, but characters, that are rejected of God: nor is it from descent, but from choice, that they fall short of the promised inheritance. In this respect, the parallel between the history and the doctrine established by it must be drawn with a due attention to all the circumstances, and must not be pressed too far. That was but a shadow; and we must distinguish between resemblance and identity. Ishmael shadowed forth those who are born after the flesh: Isaac represented those who are born after the Spirit: the former therefore characterizes all of us in our natural state; the latter, those who are regenerated by the Spirit of God. The latter, it is true, owe all their happiness to God’s electing love: but the former can never ascribe their misery to any decree of absolute reprobation. The blessings of salvation are offered equally to all: the sins of all were equally borne by the Lord Jesus Christ in his own body on the cross: for “he is a propitiation, not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” “The Lord laid on him the iniquities of us all.” Though born of the bond-woman, we may by grace become children of the free: and, if we will not avail ourselves of this proffered mercy, the fault is altogether our own. In the parable of the Marriage-supper, the man who was cast out for not having on the wedding-garment, is represented as “speechless,” having not a word to utter in his own defence. He, it is true, was poor, and had been brought in suddenly from the highways and hedges: but a wedding-garment had been provided for him by the Master of the feast, and would have been given him if he had asked for it: and therefore he was justly punished for presuming to appear at table without it. So is salvation provided for every child of man: and he who neglects to seek it, must trace his failure to that neglect. The word of our blessed Lord is decisive upon this point: “Him that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out:” if therefore the sentence be passed on us, “Cast out that son of the bond-woman,” we know whom alone we have to blame: the fault is not in God, as unwilling to save us; but in ourselves, as neglecting to seek salvation at his hands.]

From this subject we may see,
1.

What is the one standard and test of truth—

[Men place reliance on their own opinions, and cite as authority the opinions of others. But man is weak and fallible. Even in relation to things which come most under his cognizance, he is apt to err: but in the things of God, which, of necessity, are so remote from his apprehensions, he is entitled to no confidence at all; seeing that he can know nothing, any further than it has been revealed to him by God himself. But it is in the sacred volume alone that we have any revelation from God; and therefore that must, of necessity, be the only standard and test of truth. “To the word and to the testimony,” says the prophet: “if men speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them [Note: Isaías 8:20.].” Tell me not then, thou vain disputer, what thy sentiments are. “What saith the Scripture?” Thou imaginest that thou canst lay down laws for God, and tell how he shall regulate his proceedings in the day of judgment: but I must declare to thee, that “thy wisdom,” however great thou mayest imagine it, “is foolishness with God;” and that his counsel shall stand, whether thou wilt hear, or whether thou wilt forbear.]

3. On what ground our eternal destinies shall be fixed—

[I well know that men shall be judged according to their works. But we greatly mistake, if we suppose that our faith shall not become a ground of decision, either against us or in our favour, as much as any other work. It is as much “a command from God, that we believe in his Son, as that we should love one another [Note: 1 João 3:23.]:”and our compliance with it must equally be made a subject of inquiry at that day. We may think it strange, perhaps, that God should take such matters into account in the final judgment: but, whatever opinion we may form respecting it, God will then say, “Cast out the bond-woman and her son: for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman.” It will not be found a matter of such indifference, then, whether we believed in Christ or not, and whether we embraced the covenant of grace. No: this new covenant contains all the wonders of Divine wisdom, and love, and mercy: and, if we flee not to it from the terrors of the broken law, and from the fallacious hopes which are engendered by pride, his sentence will come forth against us, to our irreparable and eternal ruin. Take ye care then, beloved, that ye deceive not your own souls. Examine diligently whose children ye are, and to which family ye belong. Renounce all dependence on your own works, and lay hold on the promises of God in Christ Jesus. So shall “you, like Isaac, be the children of promise [Note: ver. 28.];” and with him be partakers of an everlasting inheritance.]