Gal. 3:13-22.
Dear brothers, I will speak in a human way: Do not despise a man's testament when it is confirmed, and do nothing about it. Now the promise is made to Abraham and his seed. He saith not, By seed, as by many; but by one, by thy seed, which is Christ. Now I say, that the testament which God hath before ordained unto Christ is not dissolved, that the promise by the law should cease, which was given four hundred and thirty years after. For if the inheritance were acquired by law, it would not be given by promise. But God gave it freely to Abraham by promise. What is the purpose of the law? It came about because of sins, until the seed came to whom the promise had been made, and was given by the angels through the hand of the mediator. But a mediator is not a mediator of one; but God is one. How? Is the law contrary to God's promises? Be it far from it! But if there were a law that could give life, then righteousness would truly come from the law. But the scripture hath decreed it all under sin, that the promise might come through faith in Jesus Christ, given to them that believe.
This is also a sharp epistle, which is incomprehensible to the common man; but it is also due to the fact that this teaching has not been practiced and practiced until now, therefore it could not be understood; so it is also too long and too rich, even to act in brevity. But it is abundantly laid out in the whole Commentary on this epistle to the Galatians, whoever wants to read it. The summary is that St. Paul here, as in the whole epistle, wanted to instruct the Christians enormously how they should distinguish between the righteousness of faith and the righteousness of works or the law. And in this text (so that we may grasp the main points a little) the apostle makes two points. The first says of the article that we are justified by faith alone, and proves this over many causes.
and proof, also from the fact that he indicates and speaks:
(2) And ye shall know and understand that no man, neither the Jews, much less other Gentiles, is justified by works or law. For the law was not given until four hundred and thirty years after Abraham (who was to be the father of all God's people) had promised and promised Christ to bless all men in him, and had already testified of him that he was justified before God through faith. And as he was justified and the blessing was granted to him because of his faith, so certainly his children and descendants were also justified and have obtained the promised blessing through the same faith in this seed, because of which the blessing was promised to all the world. For
God has always dealt with the Jews and all the world in such a way that He promised them His grace and forgiveness of sins (that is, to be blessed before God) when no law (by which they pretend to become righteous) was given, nor was Moses born.
3. therefore the law, which was given to this people only for such a long time, could not have been given so that they should be justified by it; otherwise it would have been given before; or if it were necessary for righteousness, Abraham himself and his children would not have been justified until that time etc. Yes, God arranged it for this very reason, that he gave the law so long after, which he could have given to the fathers long before; as if he wanted to show and teach by the deed that it was not given so that God's grace and blessing would come from it, but out of the pure mercy of God, which was promised so long before and also given to Abraham and others who had believed.
4 Therefore St. Paul concludes, "How could the law have helped righteousness to those who were before Moses, since he was the first by whom it was given, when before him there were also holy and blessed people? Where did they get this? Not because they sacrificed at Jerusalem or kept the law, but because they believed the word by which God promised to bless them in the future seed, Christ. Therefore, even those who lived afterwards were not justified by the Law, for they did not receive God's grace in any other way, neither did the former. Thus God did not cancel or revoke His promise of blessing, which He promised and gave without law and in vain, by the law etc.
(5) Here someone would like to be clever, and persuade St. Paul, and say: Yes, although the fathers did not have the Law of Moses, yet they also had the same Word of God, which teaches the Ten Commandments, which is also formed in the hearts of men from the beginning of the world; therefore it is also called the Law of Nature or Natural Law; except that it is afterwards publicly given to the Jewish people and written in the Ten Commandments. And
It could be said that Moses took the Ten Commandments from the fathers, as Christ also says about circumcision John 7:22. For it is certain that the fathers taught and practiced them from the beginning to their children and descendants. How then does it rhyme that St. Paul wants to conclude that the fathers were not justified by the law, because it was not given until more than four hundred years after Abraham? as if the fathers had had no law before.
(6) To answer this briefly, you must look at St. Paul's opinion where he is speaking; for he actually looks at the Jews' glory in insisting on the law as given to them by God to be God's own people; therefore, they thought that they were righteous before Him by taking care to keep it. Why else should God have given it, they said, and thereby distinguished us from all the Gentiles, if we should not be more valid and pleasing before God for the sake of the law than others who do not have it? They were so set on defiance and glory that they did not regard the promise of blessing in the future Seed, which was given to their fathers, nor did they think that they needed it in order to be justified in believing it; and thus, in essence, they considered it as if it had been annulled and made void by God; yet they did not interpret the promise of blessing outwardly to mean that Messiah would come and give them the dominion of the world and other great rewards for the sake of their law and piety.
(7) To displace such vain delusion and glory, and to prove that they were not justified by the Law, nor became children of God, he introduces this, that the holy patriarchs, their fathers, until the 430th year, were not justified by the Law (because it was not yet given), nor by some of their works (they are called the Natural Law or Ten Commandments). year, were not justified by the law of which they boasted (because it had not yet been given), nor by some of their works (called the natural law or the Ten Commandments): for God ever made no promise of blessing and blessedness on their works with them; but out of pure grace promised to bestow upon them the blessing (that is, grace or righteousness and all eternal goods) free of charge, on the future seed, which also beforehand had been given to the
first parents, without their merit, since they had fallen into God's wrath and condemnation through transgression. Therefore, although the fathers also had the knowledge of the law or God's commandment, it did not help them to become righteous before God; but they had to hear and grasp with faith the gracious promise of God, which was not based on works, but only on the future seed; for without this, where they might have been justified by law or works, there would have been no need at all for the promise of blessing in Christ etc.
(8) Therefore if Abraham and the fathers could not be justified by works, neither were they: neither were their children and their seed justified by law and works; but not otherwise, but by the faith of the promise made to Abraham and his seed, wherein not only the Jews, but all the Gentiles should be blessed (by the same faith).
(9) St. Paul continues and bases this on these two things, namely, God's promise and pure grace or gift, contrary to the glory of the law and one's own merit. To the first he adds a saying about the right and power that every testament should have, or promise of the last will and testament etc. Just as it is God's order from the fourth commandment that the last will and testament of parents should be kept by the children and heirs.
(10) Therefore he says, "If the will of man is confirmed (by the death of man), no one may change it or add to it or subtract from it. As the lawyers say that it is also a divine law that no one shall break the last will and testament of man; how much more shall God's will remain unbroken and unchanged! Now God has also made a testament, which is to be His last will and testament, that He would bless all nations through the Seed, which He first promised to the fathers; this He resolved and promised to Abraham, and in him to all the world and to all of us; and confirmed it through the death of this Seed, His only Son, who therefore had to become a man.
and die for it (as Abraham foretold in his own son Isaac, who was sacrificed to death), so that the inheritance of blessing and eternal life might be given to us etc. This is his last will, and he wills to make no other; therefore no one can or should change it, or do anything to it. But this is called adding to it, or breaking and revoking it, if now, when such a will has been opened and the blessing has been announced to all the world, one first wants to pretend that one must earn it by the law, as if it should not apply without it, by virtue of his promise and will.
11) Summa, this testament, concludes St. Paul, is a clear promise of the blessing and childship of God; therefore no law applies here that one should do to earn the blessing; nothing applies here but the will that promises and says: I will not look at your deeds, but promise you the blessing, that is, grace and eternal life, which you are found in sins and death; I will confirm this through the death of my Son, who shall earn and bring about such an inheritance for you. Since God first made such a testament without a law and thus confirmed it, the law, which was publicly given and confirmed long afterward, could not break it off, but rather abrogate and revoke it. And whoever wants to say or teach that one must become righteous through the law, that is, attain God's blessing, does not do otherwise than to reach into God's will and tear up and nullify His last will. This is a reason of St. Paul, from the word "promise" or "testament," which is well to be understood; for no one is so gross as not to be able to distinguish between the two, law or commandment and promise.
12 Secondly, St. Paul also bases it on this word: "Abraham gave it to God" etc. It is also easy for anyone who has reason to judge that it is a different thing to have something as a gift, and to deserve something; for what is deserved is given as a reward out of duty and guilt, and he who receives it is to boast (more than he who gives it) and to claim his right; but what is given for nothing and for nothing is not a reward,
as St. Paul speaks here, is given freely or by grace, there is no glory of merit nor right in him who receives it; but he alone must praise the kindness and gentleness of him from whom he received such gift etc. Thus, St. Paul concludes: God freely gave Abraham the blessing and the inheritance through the promise: therefore, He did not merit it by works, nor reward it to him, much less to his children.
(13) This is clear enough, and even a child can understand it, that the two do not exist at the same time, but must be separated, which is earned by works, as a reward, and is promised or given freely by grace and free will. And God has hereby shut the mouth of the whole world and come before it, that it has nothing to boast about, as if it had received God's grace for the sake of the law, because He promised and gave it before the law and its merit in vain; for He acted in this way with His own people, Abraham and his descendants, that He first promised to bless him and his whole family, and reports nothing about any law, work or reward, but places everything solely on the future seed.
14. to this promise they lived and died on it, he himself, Abraham,
and his children's children, until over four hundred and thirty years; then he first begins and gives the law, ordains an outward service, priesthood etc., how they should live and govern themselves, when they have now become a people of their own, redeemed from foreign rule and brought into their country, that they must also have their own outward rule; not that they should only thereby obtain forgiveness of sins and God's blessing.
This is the summary of the first part of this epistle, that St. Paul wants to teach to distinguish in this matter (if one is to teach how to become righteous before God) the two parts: promise and law, item, gift or present and merit or reward. Where one teaches that God gives forgiveness of sin and eternal life out of pure grace, for no law or reward, the question soon arises: "What is the law given for, or good for? Should one not do good works? Why are the Ten Commandments taught? That is why St. Paul comes to the conclusion that he himself asks the question as soon as he has asked it: For what purpose then is the law? and thus begins to go on at length about what is the office and use of the law, and shows the difference between it and the gospel; of which enough has been said elsewhere, also in other posts.