The Law of the Promise

Galatians 3:15-24 (ESV)
"To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. 16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. 17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. 18 For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.

19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. 20 Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one.

21 Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.22 But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith."

Introduction
Apologetics is an essential discipline of the Christian faith. It does not mean to give an apology for our faith, in the sense to ask forgiveness for what we believe. It actually means to give a defense. Apologetics is essential in two areas. First, to the people that are skeptics we must give a defense against their objections. This is important. Second, to professing believers who are easily led astray. Honestly this bears more fruit as the Holy Spirit works inside of these people confirming the truth. Paul is giving a defense to those inside of the church who have been led astray by falsehood.

Paul is defending the faith against a false gospel that the Judaizers have embraced. These people were teaching that the ground of justification, right standing with God, is submission to the ceremonial law, in particular circumcision. This meant that Paul had to address objections the people in the church had. Two of these objections were:

1. Does the Mosaic Covenant Annul the Abrahamic Covenant?
2. ​Why Did God Ratify the Mosaic Covenant?

The other thing is that we live in the postmodern era of story driven teaching. We say things like we must teach only through narrative and not through didactic method. The only problem with that view is that the Bible is a book of a variety of different genres. Some narrative, some theological letters, some prophetic, etc… When we preach through the different books of the Bible we will preach the different genres. Some here, depending on your background, will love this style of message. Others will have a hard time following. My encouragement is to make the effort to grow and follow along. This is the Bible and the Bible calls us to think in this logical linear fashion as well through stories. Both are needed for us to mature in Christ. Let’s dive in.

Objection #1: Does the Mosaic Covenant Annul the Abrahamic Covenant?
Two different covenants that God has established in history with two different men in two different times. A covenant is a binding agreement simply put. God established a covenant with Abraham promising him the land and a son. Four hundred and thirty years later God established a covenant with Moses revealing God’s character and standards in the law as well as practices to seek atonement for those violations of those standards. The Judaizers were placing the Mosaic Covenant as more important than the Abrahamic while at the same time claiming to be in continuity with Abraham. In essence they taught that the Mosaic Covenant annulled the Abrahamic Covenant. Paul deals with this in verses 15-18.

• Point #1: Paul argues from the lesser to the greater and says even when a human covenant is established it is not annulled by by a later covenant. Once it is ratified then it is done. Another covenant will not annul it. So, how much more with a covenant that God makes? The God who cannot lie will not go back on a promise that he made. He made this promise with Abraham.​

"The God who cannot lie will not go back on a promise what he made."

​

• Point #2: Paul gives more light as to what the Abrahamic covenant actually was, in Genesis 12:7 and then in Genesis 15:5 when the promise was reiterated. He makes the point that the promise was not to his offsprings in the plural, but offspring in the singular. In essence, just by being a physical son of Abraham did not mean this covenantal promise was to you. Case and point. Abraham had a son by adultery named Ishmael and the promise was not to him. In essence Paul is making the point that this covenant was ultimately with the offspring which is Christ. Those who fall in the lineage of Christ will also be the ones who become beneficiaries of this covenant. At the core the Abrahamic covenant was a covenant that God made with God.
  
  
• Point #3: The third point Paul makes is that Abraham himself would not have been approved as a true believer today as he did not adhere to the Mosaic covenant as the Mosaic covenant was not put in place until 430 years after. They claimed to be the son of Abraham while at the same time teaching something that Abraham himself failed at. A contemporary example is right before us today. We have people who say that in order to be an American you must stand for the national anthem. The only problem is that this was not the national anthem until 150 years after our founding. So, our founding fathers would have failed this test. To be an American means we adhere to the constitution, not stand, sit, kneel, for a sacred song. To be a son of Abraham is not to submit to the Mosaic law, but to believe in the same promise Abraham believed in. The promise of the future seed.​

"To be a son of Abraham is not to submit to the Mosaic law, but to believe in the same promise Abraham believed in."

• Point #4: Paul says that if the inheritance, which is Christ, comes by the law then it no longer comes by a promise. A promise is based on God’s word and his faithfulness and the inheritance being gained by the law is dependent on our faithfulness. Which one would we rather subscribe to?

Objection #2: Why Did God Ratify the Mosaic Covenant?
After Abraham was dead and gone the Israelites found themselves enslaved to Egypt. God sent a leader named Moses. God used Moses to lead the Israelites from bondage to freedom. They were being led out to form a new nation. As a new nation God gave them a new law. Foundational to that was to not have another God before Him. What He means is to not have a God like Egypt over them. Then God spelled out in detail the roles the individual, family, church, and state had in God’s government. This spells out for us how a just society would live with decentralized power under His Law. Paul then answers why was the Law given.

• Point #1: The Mosaic law was ratified because of transgressions. This is willful rebellion of God. There are two senses of this. First, it was added to refrain the people from external transgressions against their neighbor, in particular defending life, liberty, and property of the other people. The common notion that you cannot legislate morality is wrong and God’s word was binding over the citizens in order to legislate morality. The second part of the law was to show us the depths of our depravity and how we are transgressors. This reveals to us the need of the offspring. It reveals to us our need of Christ. Here Paul mentions a twofold usefulness of God’s law.
  
  
• Point #2: It was added to act as a guardian until Christ comes (19b, 21-24). The law and the promise do not contradict but they complete. The law acts as a guardian or in other verses a schoolmaster. The historical use of this word “guardian, schoolmaster” referred to someone who was more of a tutor. They would take the child to class, make sure they behaved and listened, and then reiterate what the teacher taught. This was the main role. They were to take the student to the teacher. The law of God serves this purpose. The law itself does not give life, but it takes the student to the one that can. The law is not the master teacher but takes the student to the master teacher.​

"The law itself does not give life, but it takes the student to the one that can."

• Point #3: The law was added through an intermediary. Who just was this intermediary? Many would conclude that it was Moses. He was the intermediary who who received the law through the angels. Have you caught that before? I have not. Reference is made to Deut. 33:2; Acts 7:53, and Heb. 2:2 talking about the role the angels had in delivering this law. The angels were involved, but was Moses the intermediary? I don’t think so! Look at what Paul adds in verse 20, “Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one.” He is saying that an intermediary implies that there would be more than one party involved in this covenantal agreement. Then He says but God is one. In essence He is saying that only one party was involved because only God was involved in ratifying this covenant. It seems the point He is making is that God the Father ratified the Mosaic Covenant with God the Son. The same point earlier was that the Abrahamic covenant was ultimately with the offspring. Paul is making the case that these covenants are not contrary to each other, but they are different aspects of the same covenant. The covenant that the Father has with the Son. Abraham and those who follow the promise become beneficiaries. Moses and all of those who find themselves at the end of the law brought to the offspring of promise become beneficiaries. God has made a covenant with God.

The Covenant of Redemption
This points to the greater covenant that was made. It was the covenant of redemption that the Father had made with the Son before the foundation of the world. The beneficiaries of this covenant were those that God elected before the foundation of the world. God chose to love His elect which necessitated Him to establish this covenant. God established that the only way that his elect could be redeemed was by a redemption price to be paid. That redemption price was the blood of an innocent man. He told Abraham that this innocent man would be one of his offspring. He told Moses that he would fulfill the requirements of the law as well as the primary offices of prophet, priest, and King. Justification is then not based on a works righteousness, but it is based upon God keeping His word. If you have been redeemed by the blood of Christ that revealed the reality that God has kept His word. He will not go back on it.

"Justification is not based on works of righteousness, but upon God keeping his word."

​Do you understand what that means? That should be the most liberating news that you have ever received in your life. You salvation is not based on you and you keeping promises. It is based on God and His keeping of them.


Contributor / Eric Stewart
Eric Stewart is the Lead Pastor of ONElife Church in Flint, MI.