KJV: Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
YLT: which things are allegorized, for these are the two covenants: one, indeed, from mount Sinai, to servitude bringing forth, which is Hagar;
Darby: Which things have an allegorical sense; for these are two covenants: one from mount Sinai, gendering to bondage, which is Hagar.
ASV: Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.
| ἅτινά | which things |
|
Parse: Personal / Relative Pronoun, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: ὅστις Sense: whoever, whatever, who. |
|
| ἀλληγορούμενα | allegorized |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Neuter Plural Root: ἀλληγορέω Sense: to speak allegorically or in a figure. |
|
| αὗται | these |
|
Parse: Demonstrative Pronoun, Nominative Feminine Plural Root: οὗτος Sense: this. |
|
| δύο | two |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Feminine Plural Root: δύο Sense: the two, the twain. |
|
| διαθῆκαι | covenants |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Plural Root: διαθήκη Sense: a disposition, arrangement, of any sort, which one wishes to be valid, the last disposition which one makes of his earthly possessions after his death, a testament or will. |
|
| μία | one |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: εἷς Sense: one. |
|
| μὲν | indeed |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: μέν Sense: truly, certainly, surely, indeed. |
|
| ὄρους | Mount |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Singular Root: ὄρος Sense: a mountain. |
|
| Σινᾶ | Sinai |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Neuter Singular Root: Σινά Sense: a mountain or rather a mountainous region in the peninsula of Arabia Petraea, made famous by the giving of the Mosaic law. |
|
| εἰς | unto |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: εἰς Sense: into, unto, to, towards, for, among. |
|
| δουλείαν | slavery |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: δουλεία Sense: slavery, bondage, the condition of a slave. |
|
| γεννῶσα | begetting |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: γεννάω Sense: of men who fathered children. |
|
| Ἁγάρ | Hagar |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: Ἁγάρ Sense: Abraham’s concubine and mother to Ishmael. |
|
Greek Commentary for Galatians 4:24
Literally, “Which things are allegorized” (periphrastic present passive indicative of αλληγορεω allēgoreō). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used αινιττομαι ainittomai to speak in riddles. It is compounded of αλλο allo another, and αγορευω agoreuō to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses τυπικως tupikōs in 1 Corinthians 10:11 of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan‘s Pilgrim‘s Progress, the Prodigal Son in Luke 15, the Good Shepherd in John 10. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo‘s allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. [source]
Allegorically interpreted, he means. From Mount Sinai (απο ορους Σινα apo orous Sinā). Spoken from Mount Sinai. Bearing Present active participle of γενναω gennaō to beget of the male (Matthew 1:1-16), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke 1:13, Luke 1:57). Which is Hagar (ητις εστιν αγαρ hētis estin Hagar). Allegorically interpreted. [source]
Spoken from Mount Sinai. [source]
Present active participle of γενναω gennaō to beget of the male (Matthew 1:1-16), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke 1:13, Luke 1:57). Which is Hagar (ητις εστιν αγαρ hētis estin Hagar). Allegorically interpreted. [source]
Allegorically interpreted. [source]
Hagar and Sarah are, allegorically. Signify. Comp. Matthew 13:20, Matthew 13:38; Matthew 26:26, Matthew 26:28; 1 Corinthians 10:4, 1 Corinthians 10:16. [source]
N.T.oLit. are allegorised. From ἄλλο another ἀγορεύειν tospeak. Hence, things which are so spoken as to give a different meaning from that which the words express. For parable, allegory, fable, and proverb, see on Matthew 13:3. An allegory is to be distinguished from a type. An O.T. type is a real prefiguration of a N.T. fact, as the Jewish tabernacle explained in John href="/desk/?q=joh+3:14&sr=1">John 3:14. Comp. Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 10:6, 1 Corinthians 10:11. An allegory exhibits figuratively the ideal character of a fact. The type allows no latitude of interpretation. The allegory lends itself to various interpretations. This passage bears traces of Paul's rabbinical training. At the time of Christ, Scripture was overlaid with that enormous mass of rabbinic interpretation which, beginning as a supplement to the written law, at last superseded and threw it into contempt. The plainest sayings of Scripture were resolved into another sense; and it was asserted by one of the Rabbis that he that renders a verse of Scripture as it appears, says what is not true. The celebrated Akiba assumed that the Pentateuch was a continuous enigma, and that a meaning was to be found in every monosyllable, and a mystical sense in every hook and flourish of the letters. The Talmud relates how Akiba was seen by Moses in a vision, drawing from every horn of every letter whole bushels of decisions. The oral laws, subsequently reduced to writing in the Talmud, completely overshadowed and superseded the Scriptures, so that Jesus was literally justified in saying: “Thus have ye make the commandment of God of none effect through your tradition.” Paul had been trained as a Rabbi in the school of Hillel, the founder of the rabbinical system, whose hermeneutic rules were the basis of the Talmud. As Jowett justly says: “Strange as it may at first appear that Paul's mode of interpreting the Old Testament Scriptures should not conform to our laws of logic or language, it would be far stranger if it had not conformed with the natural modes of thought and association in his own day.” His familiarity with this style of exposition gave him a real advantage in dealing with Jews. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It is a much-mooted question whether, in this passage, Paul is employing an argument or an illustration. The former would seem to be the case. On its face, it seems improbable that, as Dr. Bruce puts it: “it is poetry rather than logic, meant not so much to convince the reason as to captivate the imagination.” Comp. the argument in Galatians 3:16, and see note. It appears plain that Paul believed that his interpretation actually lay hidden in the O.T. narrative, and that he adduced it as having argumentative force. Whether he regarded the correspondence as designed to extend to all the details of his exposition may be questioned; but he appears to have discerned in the O.T. narrative a genuine type, which he expanded into his allegory. For other illustrations of this mode of treatment, see Romans 2:24; Romans 9:33; 1 Corinthians 2:9; 1 Corinthians 9:9, 1 Corinthians 9:10; 1 Corinthians 10:1-4. [source]
Covenant. [source]
The covenant emanating from Sinai: made on that mountain. The old covenant. See 2 Corinthians 3:14. [source]
That is, the Sinaitic covenant places its children in a condition of bondage; note the personification and the allegorical blending of fact and figure. [source]
The Sinaitic covenant is that which, in Abraham's history, is Hagar: which is allegorically identified with Hagar the bondmaid. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Galatians 4:24
Change to the imperfect επινον epinon shows their continual access to the supernatural source of supply. The Israelites were blessed by the water from the rock that Moses smote at Rephidim (Exodus 17:6) and at Kadesh (Numbers 20:11) and by the well of Beer (Numbers 21:16). The rabbis had a legend that the water actually followed the Israelites for forty years, in one form a fragment of rock fifteen feet high that followed the people and gushed out water. Baur and some other scholars think that Paul adopts this “Rabbinical legend that the water-bearing Rephidim rock journeyed onwards with the Israelites” (Findlay). That is hard to believe, though it is quite possible that Paul alludes to this fancy and gives it a spiritual turn as a type of Christ in allegorical fashion. Paul knew the views of the rabbis and made use of allegory on occasion (Galatians 4:24). [source]
The sentence is not parenthetical. This covenant is the Hagar of that allegorical history which is explained by the resemblance of her name to the Arabic name of Sinai. The Greek order is not ὄρος Σινὰ , as Galatians 4:24, but Σινὰ ὄρος , in order to bring into juxtaposition the two names which are declared to coincide. The evidence, however, for the actual identity of the names is deficient. The proper name Hagar signifies wanderer or fugitive (Arab. hadschar comp. Hegira the term for the flight of Mahomet). It has probably been confounded with the Arabic chadschar a stone or rock, which cannot be shown to be an Arabic designation of Sinai. The similarity of the first two gutturals might easily lead to the mistake. [source]
The double relative classifies; things which came under the category of gain. Compare Galatians 4:24; Colossians 2:23. [source]
The double relative classifies, putting these precepts and teachings, and all that are like them, in one category: a class of things which. For similar usage, see Galatians 4:24; Galatians 5:19; Philemon 4:3. [source]
Only here in Pastorals. In Paul, metaphorically, 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10; Galatians 4:24. [source]