Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Galatians 3:18
For if the inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
18. The concluding words of the previous verse suggest the thought ‘Yes, the promise would be at once invalidated, if the inheritance were dependent on the law’. Law and promises, works and faith, are opposing principles, of which the antagonism is most clearly seen in their issues condemnation and justification. We have a parallel passage in Rom 4:13; comp. also Rom 11:6.
God gave it ] Has bestowed as a free gift. ‘The perfect tense marks the permanence of its effects.’ Bp. Lightfoot. All who enjoy it or shall enjoy it, do so as the gift of God’s sovereign mercy, unsolicited, unmerited, unconditional. To see the force of the verb here rendered ‘gave’, we may compare Luk 7:42, ‘he frankly (freely) forgave them’, ‘made them a present of the amount owed’, Rom 8:32; 1Co 2:12.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For if the inheritance – The inheritance promised to Abraham. The sum of the promise was, that he should be the heir of the world; see Rom 4:13, and the note at that verse. To that heirship or inheritance Paul refers here, and says that it was an essential part of it that it was to be in virtue of the promise made to him, and not by fulfilling the Law.
Be of the law – If it is by observing the Law of Moses; or if it come in any way by the fulfilling of law. This is plain. Yet the Jews contended that the blessings of justification and salvation were to be in virtue of the observance of the Law of Moses. But if so, says Paul, then it could not be by the promise made to Abraham, since there could not be two ways of obtaining the same blessing.
But God gave it to Abraham by promise – That, says Paul, is a settled point. It is perfectly clear; and that is to be held as an indisputable fact, that the blessing was given to Abraham by a promise. That promise was confirmed and ratified hundreds of years before the Law was given, and the giving of the Law could not affect it. But that promise was, that he would be the ancestor of the Messiah, and that in him all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Of course, if they were to be blessed in this way, then it was not to be by the observance of the Law, and the Law must have been given for a different purpose. What that was, he states in the following verses.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Gal 3:18
For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise.
Law and promise
I. The law was restricted and conditional–added because of transgression: the promise was absolute and unconditional.
II. The law was temporary and provisional–until the seed should come: the promise was permanent and eternal.
III. The law was communicated indirectly–by angels: the promise was directly given by God (Heb 2:2-3).
IV. The law was received from God through a mediator: the promise was received by Abraham in person. (P. J. Gloag, D. D.)
The covenant of grace is called the promise, because God hath promised both the reward and the condition. And so–
I. It differs from human covenants. Among men each party undertaketh for and looketh after his own part of the engagement; but here the duties required of us are undertaken by Him that, requireth them. No man filleth his neighbours hand with anything to pay his rent to him, or enableth him to do what he hath covenanted to do; but God filleth our heart with a stock of habitual grace, with actual influences to draw forth habits into act (Eze 36:26-27; Jer 32:39-40).
II. It differs from the covenant of works. That had more of a law and less of a promise: there was a promise of reward to the obeyer but none of obedience. There man was to keep the covenant; here the covenant keepeth us (Jer 32:40). God undertaketh for both parties, and worketh in His people all that is required of them. (T. Manton.)
The inheritance of the promises
I. The promises of God to the believer an inexhaustible mine of wealth. Happy is it for him if he knows how to enrich himself with their hidden treasures.
II. They are an armoury containing all manner of offensive and defensive weapons. Blessed is he who has learned to enter the sacred arsenal, to put on the breastplate and the helmet, and to lay his hand to the spear and the sword.
III. They are a surgery in which the believer will find all manner of restoratives and blessed elixirs; nor lacks there an ointment for every wound, a cordial for every faintness, a remedy for every disease. Blessed is he who is well skilled in heavenly pharmacy, and knoweth how to lay hold on the healing virtues of the promises of God. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Life gift
On these streets, I have seen the poor hanging on the steps of the rich, and refusing to be ordered away; to move pity, laying bare their sores; and holding out their skinny hands to implore mens charity. But whoever saw the rich following the poor, with a hand filled with gold;pressing money on their acceptance; stopping them; entreating, beseeching, imploring them to take it? Yet thus, to the amazement both of angels and devils, God does with you, in offering His Son; and through Him, the gift of eternal life. (Dr. Guthrie.)
Salvation all of grace
Mr. McLaren and Mr. Gustart were ministers of the Tolbooth Church, Edinburgh. When Mr. McLaren was dying, Mr. Gustart paid him a visit, and put the question to him, What are you doing, brother? His answer was, Doing! Ill tell you what I am doing, brother. I am gathering together all my prayers, all my sermons, all my good deeds, all my evil deeds; and I am going to throw them all overboard, and swim to glory on the plank of free grace. (E. Foster.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 18. For if the inheritance be of the law] See the preceding arguments, in which this is proved.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
If the inheritance of the heavenly Canaan, typified by the earthly Canaan, the promise of which was made to Abraham, be to be obtained by the fulfilling of the law, and yielding obedience to it, then it is no more of the promise. It is much the same with what the apostle said before, Rom 4:14; and with what he had said, Rom 11:6; If by grace, then it is no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise work is no more work. He shows, that there is an opposition between grace and work, the law and the promise; that which is of grace, and of the promise, is of free love; that which is of works, and the law, is wages, and a reward of debt.
But (saith the apostle) God gave the inheritance to Abraham by promise; he of his free love engaging himself thereunto.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18. the inheritanceall theblessings to be inherited by Abraham’s literal and spiritualchildren, according to the promise made to him and to his Seed,Christ, justification and glorification (Gal 4:7;Rom 8:17; 1Co 6:9).
but God, &c.TheGreek order requires rather, “But to Abraham it was bypromise that God hath given it.” The conclusion is, Thereforethe inheritance is not of, or from the law (Ro4:14).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For if the inheritance be of the law,…. By the inheritance is meant, either the eternal inheritance, everlasting life and happiness in heaven, which is the gift of God through Christ, and not attained to and enforced by the works of the law; or particularly the blessing of justification, promised in the covenant to Abraham, and his spiritual seed; even to the Gentiles, and inherited by them; which is not obtained through obedience to the law of works, nor does it belong to those who seek for it by the deeds of the law, for these are not heirs of it; see Ro 4:14. For was this the case,
it is no more of promise; it cannot be by merit and by promise, by works and grace too; these can never be reconciled, and consist together; if it is by promise, then not of the law; and if it is of the law, it is not by promise: “but” nothing is more certain than this, that
God gave it, freely, without any consideration of the works of the law,
to Abraham by promise; wherefore justification is not by works, but by the free grace of God, through faith in the righteousness of Christ; and in this way men become heirs according to the hope of eternal life: all which is directly opposite to the notion of the Jews, who say, that, ,
“for the reward of the commandments, men shall inherit paradise k.”
k Tzeror Hammor, fol. 152. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The inheritance ( ). Old word from , heir (, lot, , to distribute). See on Matt 21:38; Acts 7:5. This came to Israel by the promise to Abraham, not by the Mosaic law. So with us, Paul argues.
Hath granted (). Perfect middle indicative of . It still holds good after the law came.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
In the analogy of verse 15 there was contemplated the double possibility of invalidation or addition. With relation to God ‘s promise, the Judaisers insisted on addition; since, while they preached faith in the promise and in its fulfillment in Christ, they made the inheritance of the promise dependent upon the fulfilling of the law. Paul, on the other hand, holds that the Judaistic addition involves invalidation. Salvation must rest either upon the promise or upon the law. The Judaiser said, upon the promise and the law. For God gave the inheritance to Abraham by promise. It has been shown that the law did not abrogate the promise. Hence, if the inheritance be of the law it is no more of the promise. Comp. Rom 4:14.
Gave [] . Freely bestowed as a gracious gift. See on Luk 7:21.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For if the inheritance be of the law,” (ei gar ek nomou he kleronomia) “For if the inheritance exists of, or has its origin in, the law;” note, the “inheritance” or heir setting involves more than salvation of the Soul. It also involves 1) The Natural seed of Abraham’s possession of the original land-grant promise to Abraham, Gen 15:18; Gen 15:2) A position of joint-heir reigning heritage over the Land by members of our Lord’s church, with the twelve apostles sitting in twelve throne positions of judgment, Luk 22:30; 2Ti 2:12.
2) “It is no more of promise,” (ouketi eks epangelias) “It no more exists of promise,” the promise made to Abraham, by faith. Neither salvation nor a right of inheritance reign, under Christ, over the Promised land territory is acquired through media of the law of Moses and its ceremonies and rites.
3) “But God gave it to Abraham by promise,” (t6 de Abraam di epanglias kecharistai ho theos) “But God has given it to Abraham through promise,” and His promises are sure, secure, and steadfast, 1Ki 8:56; Heb 6:8; Heb 10:23; Heb 11:11; Jos 23:15; Gen 17:1-8.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
18. If the inheritance be of the law. His opponents might still reply, that nothing was farther from their intention than to weaken or disannul God’s covenant. To deprive them of every kind of subterfuge, he comes forward with the assertion, that salvation by the law, and salvation by the promise of God, are wholly inconsistent with each other. Who will dare to explain this as applying to ceremonies alone, while Paul comprehends under it whatever interferes with a free promise? Beyond all doubt, he excludes works of every description. “For,” says he to the Romans,
“
if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect.” (Rom 4:14.)
Why so? Because salvation would be suspended on the condition of satisfying the law; and so he immediately concludes:
“
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, in order that the promise might be sure to all the seed.” (Rom 4:16.)
Let us carefully remember the reason why, in comparing the promise with the law, the establishment of the one overturns the other. The reason is, that the promise has respect to faith, and the law to works. Faith receives what is freely given, but to works a reward is paid. And he immediately adds, God gave it to Abraham, not by requiring some sort of compensation on his part, but by free promise; for if you view it as conditional, the word gave, ( κεχάρισται,) would be utterly inapplicable.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(18) The fulfilment of the promise is unaffected by the Law. For it is not dependent upon the Law, or upon the Law and the promise combined (the Law modifying the promise), but upon the promise alone. The Law does not come in at all. Law and promisein other words, contract and free giftare incompatible ideas. But the land of Canaan was promised to Abraham as a free gift, and as a free gift the spiritual Canaan is thrown open to his spiritual descendants.
The inheritance.In the first instance, the temporal inheritance of the land of Canaan; but here understood of the spiritual blessings of the Messianic kingdom.
Gave it.In the original a strong word: God hath freely given it. There is an antithesis to the idea of covenant or contract, in which both parties have to perform a part. The promise was given by God to Abraham freely, gratuitously, unfettered by any engagement on his side by the non-fulfilment of which it might be made void.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
18. Nor must the law be credited as the ground of the inheritance; for law and promise are contrary things: and the historic truth is, that God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For if the inheritance is of the Law, it is no more of promise. But God has granted it to Abraham by promise.’
The later inheritance, to be obtained by fulfilment of the Law, was dependent on fulfilling the Law. If that fulfilment failed the promise failed. But the promise to Abraham was given a long time before the Law ever existed, and at the time when it was given, it was not dependent on anything but the faithfulness of God. It was a free unfettered promise, and it included the nations of the world. Thus it has nothing to do with the Law, and can be enjoyed without recourse to the Law. It preceded the Law and transcends the Law.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Gal 3:18 . “I am right in denying, that through the law the passes out of force and the promise is to cease.” The proof depends on the relation of contrast between law and promise, whereby the working of the one excludes the like working of the other. For if the possession of the Messianic salvation proceeds from the law , which must have been the case if God’s covenant with Abraham had lost its validity by means of the law, then this possession comes no longer from promise , a case which, although necessary on that supposition, cannot occur, as is evident from the precedent of Abraham, to whom salvation was given by God through promise . The mode of conclusion adopted in Rom 4:14 is similar.
] so that the law is the institution which causes this result (in the way of following its commandments). Comp. on , Gal 3:11 .
] the possession , , refers in the theocratic-historical sense of the O.T. to the land of Canaan and its several portions (Deu 4:21 ; Jos 13:23 ); but in its N.T. sense, the conception of the is elevated to the idea of its Messianic fulfilment (Mat 5:5 ), so that the kingdom of the Messiah and the whole of its fulness of salvation and glory are understood thereby (1Co 6:9 ; Gal 5:21 ; Eph 5:5 ; Act 20:32 , et al.). Comp. on Rom 4:13 ; Eph 1:11 . So also here; and Paul uses this word (not , , or the like) because he has previously (see on Gal 3:16 ) referred to passages in which the (that is, according to this Christian idealizing of the O.T. historical sense: the kingdom of the Messiah) is promised.
] The one relation, if it exists, cancels the other. It is (in opposition to Koppe) the logical (not historical) no longer. Comp. Rom 7:17 ; Rom 11:6 .
] by means of promise, so that in his case the possession of the Messianic salvation is the fulfilment (by way of grace) of a promise, and not the possible result (by way of reward) of rendering prescribed services, and the like, which fall under the idea of the .
] sc. donavit (Vulgate), bestowed by way of gift (the contrast to , Rom 4:4 ; Rom 4:16 ), namely, as a future possession to be realized at the time of the (Mat 8:11 ). On , comp. Rom 8:32 ; 1Co 2:12 ; Phi 1:29 ; Phi 2:9 ; Act 27:24 ; Xen. Cyrop. 8:6. 22; Polyb. xvi. 24. 9. Without supplying anything, Schott and Matthias render: to Abraham God has, through promise, been gracious. Comp. Holsten: He has bestowed a favour on him. But the supplying of harmonizes best with the immediate context and the logical relation of the two divisions of the verse, the second of which forms the propositio minor, and therefore, like the major, must speak of the . [139] Caspari (in d. Strassb. Beitr . 1854, p. 206 ff.), following classical usage, but not that of the N.T., has wrongly taken in a passive sense, so that God is conceived as the inheritance. This is in opposition to the context, and also against the view of the N.T. generally, according to which the proceeds from God (Rom 8:17 ), and is not God Himself, but eternal life (Gal 3:21 ; Tit 3:7 ; Mat 19:29 , et al .), the kingdom of the Messiah (Gal 5:21 ; 1Co 6:9 ; 1Co 15:50 ; Jas 2:5 ), and its salvation (Rom 1:16 ) and dominion (Rom 4:13 f.; Mat 5:5 ; 2Ti 2:12 ).
[139] Ver. 18 is a syllogismus conditionalis of the nature of a dilemma, the conclusion of which, because self-obvious, is not expressed.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Ver. 18. Gave it to Abraham ] Gr. , freely gave it. What is more free than a gift? And what better freehold than the divine promise?
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18 .] See Rom 4:14 . For if the inheritance (the general term for all the blessings promised to Abraham, as summed up in his Seed who was to inherit the land, in other words, for the Kingdom of Christ: see 1Co 6:9-10 ) is of the law (i.e. by virtue of the law, having as its ground the covenant of the law) it is no more ( , as in argumentative passages, not of time, but logical the follows on the hypothesis) of (by virtue of) promise: but (the ‘but’ of a demonstration, appealing to a well-known fact) to Abraham by promise hath God granted ( it ) (and therefore it is not of the Law).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
no more. Gr ouketi, no longer.
gave = has granted. Greek. charizomai. App-184.
by. Greek. dia. App-104. Gal 3:1.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
18.] See Rom 4:14. For if the inheritance (the general term for all the blessings promised to Abraham, as summed up in his Seed who was to inherit the land,-in other words, for the Kingdom of Christ: see 1Co 6:9-10) is of the law (i.e. by virtue of the law, having as its ground the covenant of the law) it is no more ( , as in argumentative passages, not of time, but logical-the follows on the hypothesis) of (by virtue of) promise: but (the but of a demonstration, appealing to a well-known fact) to Abraham by promise hath God granted (it) (and therefore it is not of the Law).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Gal 3:18. , if) A conditional syllogism, of which, when the consequent is taken away, the antecedent is taken away; so that the conclusion is, therefore the inheritance is not from the law.- , God) Here the promise is expressly predicated of God.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Gal 3:18
Gal 3:18
For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise:-If the inheritance covenanted to all nations, in the promise to Abraham, came through the law of Moses, that rendered the prior promises of none effect. [The fulfillment of the promise is unaffected by the law. For it is not dependent upon the law, or upon the law and the promise combined-the law modifying the promise-but upon the promise alone. The law does not come in at all. Law and promise are incompatible ideas.]
but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise.-The land of Canaan was promised to Abraham as a free gift, and as a free gift the spiritual Canaan is thrown open to his spiritual descendants.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
if: Gal 3:10, Gal 3:12, Gal 3:26, Gal 3:29, Gal 2:21, Rom 4:13-16, Rom 8:17
but: Gal 3:16, Psa 105:6-12, Psa 105:42, Mic 7:18-20, Luk 1:54, Luk 1:55, Luk 1:72, Luk 1:73, Heb 6:12-15
Reciprocal: Gen 17:2 – And I Gen 21:10 – heir Gen 22:18 – And in Luk 10:25 – to Act 26:6 – the promise Rom 4:14 – For if Eph 1:11 – we 1Pe 1:4 – an
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gal 3:18. , -For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise. The shows strongly the basis of the previous statement-if the law abrogate the promise, inheritance comes of law; but law and promise are quite antagonistic in nature, so that if it be of law, the promise is completely set aside. The one hypothesis excludes the other-there is no middle ground. has its usual significance of origin, and is used in a logical sense-no more, not in point of time, but by force of inference. Winer, 65, 10. The inheritance was to Abraham the land of Canaan; and as the name is naturally employed in connection with the Abrahamic covenant, of which it was the characteristic term and gift, it became a symbol of spiritual blessing, or of the better country, as the apostle argues in Hebrews 11 It does not mean expressly the Holy Spirit (Gwynne).
-but God has given it to Abraham by promise. By promise, or through promise-through the medium of promise; not exactly in the form of promise (Rckert, Peile), though that is the result. The verb is used in its common transitive signification, the inheritance being understood; and the perfect tense denotes the duration of the gift. Compare Rom 8:32; 1Co 2:12; Php 1:29. It alters the connection to make Christ the object of the gift, as Grotius; or to supply no object at all, as Schott, Olshausen, and Matthias (gratiosum se ei exhibuit); or to take the verb in a passive sense, God giving Himself as the inheritance, as Caspari. This is not the usage of the New Testament which never identifies God with the inheritance, but describes Him as its Giver, Lord, and Possessor. Rom 8:17; 1Co 6:9; 1Co 15:50; Eph 5:5; Jam 2:5. The object of the apostle is to show the validity of the promise having for its gift the inheritance, which, if it be of law, cannot be of promise; but the fact is, that God gave it to Abraham by promise, and it cannot be of law. What is expressed as the subject of the first or conditional clause is naturally supplied as the object of the second or demonstrative clause, resting on the great historical fact which was universally admitted. The point of the argument is lost in generality if no accusative be supplied. For the verse is a species of dilemmatic syllogism, the first giving the hypothesis-disjunctive major-if the inheritance be of the law, it is no longer of promise; the minor being, but God has given it to Abraham by promise; and the conclusion is so self-evident that it does not need to be expressed-therefore it is not of the law. For similar reasoning, see Rom 4:13, etc. If, then, the law cannot upset the promise, and yet if that law be of divine origin and introduction, what is its use and meaning? It must serve some purpose worthy of its Author, though its functions be very different from those assigned it by the Galatian Judaists. Therefore the apostle puts the question-
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Gal 3:18. The inheritance means the blessing that was to be offered to all nations of the world through his seed. The argument of the verse is that if the blessing was to come through the law (as the Judaizers were teaching), then it could not have been connected with the promise first made to Abraham, for that was done many centuries before the law. And yet it was well known that God actually did give the promise of universal blessing to Abraham. The grand conclusion, then, is that the blessing intended for all nations (not the Jews only) was not the product of the law.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Gal 3:18. If the inheritance, i.e., all the temporal and spiritual blessings promised to Abraham and culminating in the Christian salvation (comp. the word inheritance, Mat 5:5; Act 20:32; 1Co 6:9; Gal 5:21), proceeded from the Law and depended on its observance, it could be no more the gift of promise or of free grace, which can be apprehended only by a living faith. This, however, is plainly contradicted by the case of Abraham, who received the inheritance by free grace, and not by law, which then was not yet given. Law and works are inseparably connected, and so are promise (or grace) and faith. Law and promise are used here without the article as representing two opposite principles.
Hath freely given, bestowed it as a free gift The perfect tense marks the permanence of the effect (Lightfoot).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise: but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise. [Brethren, I wish to use an illustration taken from our daily business life, viz.: that of our usage concerning contracts or agreements. Now if, when a human contract has once been confirmed, it becomes so sacred that no man will presume to annul or change it without the consent of both parties, much more is a covenant of God’s too sacred to be modified or tampered with. But God made such a ratified or confirmed contract or covenant with Abraham, for he spoke promises to Abraham, and to his seed. Not in fact meaning to Abraham and all his posterity, but to Abraham and his spiritual posterity (for he used a word which may be so interpreted), for he did not use the plural “seeds,” but the singular “seed,” thereby referring especially to Christ as the head of the spiritual posterity. Now, I say therefore, that this covenant, having been confirmed before the law came, still holds good, and can not be annulled by the coming of the law, for the law, as you know, did not come until four hundred and thirty years after the covenant was confirmed. Now, to sum up what I have said, the promise, being given to the seed of Abraham, becomes to them an inheritance, and inheritances do not come from two parties, but from one; so, if the inheritance had been derived from the law, it could not have been derived from the promise also; but it was derived from the promise, since God thus gave it to Abraham. We lack space for the grammatical and chronological difficulties of this passage. Suffice it to say, “seed,” being a collective noun, is capable of being applied to many; but it is also, as Paul says, capable of being applied to one, and none of his auditors would object at all to his thus applying it solely to Christ. Again, if the term of four hundred and thirty years is inaccurate, it is the number given in the Septuagint, which was then universally used. And, for argumentative purposes, was sufficiently correct as a round number.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 18
Of promise; that is, in fulfilment of a promise.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
3:18 {21} For if the {n} inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
(21) An objection: we grant that the promise was not cancelled by the covenant of the Law, and therefore we join the Law with the promise. No, the apostle says, these two cannot stand together, that is, that the inheritance should both be given by the Law and also by promise, for the promise is free. And from this it follows that the Law was not given to justify, for by that means the promise would be broken.
(n) By this word “inheritance” is meant the right of the seed, which is, that God should be our God, that is to say, that by virtue of the covenant that was made with faithful Abraham, we that are faithful might by that means be blessed by God as well as Abraham.