One of the things we’ve been acknowledging over the past number of weeks is that looking to our works (our good works, our obedience to God’s commands) is not a way of getting right with God. It’s not a way of being justified before God. Rather, we are justified before God by faith in Christ so that no good work we have done contributes to our right standing before God. Now, lest we have accepted this thought too easily and think it just normal and obvious thinking, let me remind you that every religion besides Christianity thinks that we’re justified before whatever god it is that they worship based on our good works. And some groups that call themselves Christians think that they’re justified according to obeying God’s laws or commands.
So, we’re not saying something today that everyone out there agrees with. And it sounds foolish to the world. I mean, suppose you walk up to someone who has just said that he’s committing adultery, has just stolen from someone, and would like to go out and murder someone and told him, “If you don’t change, you’ll go to hell.” He would probably agree with you. He would know that adulterers, thieves, and murderers do not inherit the kingdom of God. However, let me give you another scene. I was one day in my office with a man who had dropped by off the street to talk. He was asking for some advice or assistance, and then at one point in the conversation, he wanted me to know why he was deserving of the Lord’s blessing. So, he began to tell me how he sold these oxygen tanks to people and yet when he found someone in a nursing home who was really down and out and had little to know income left, he would give the unit to them at cost, at times, even taking a loss on it. Now, what do you think his response would have been if I’d said, “If you don’t change what you’re doing, you’ll go to hell”? He would have thought I must have misunderstood him, thought he was telling me he beats up little old ladies in nursing homes or something. Surely, he would think to himself, “This pastor cannot think that I’m threatened with hell because I want God’s blessing in my life and therefore give oxygen tanks to old people who can’t afford them.”
But that’s exactly what we’ve been saying. If someone relies on the works of the law they are under a curse. That is, if someone seeks to obey the commands of God given in the law as a way to stand righteous before God at his judgment, they will only end up meriting God’s displeasure, curse, and judgment. And the reason why is because the law says, “You better do more than give a discount to old ladies on your oxygen tanks. You better obey everything God has commanded perfectly or you are cursed.” We are saying to that man in my office that day, “Stop it or you’ll go to hell.” We’re saying, “Stop relying on your good works to be righteous before God and place your faith in his Son who lived a perfect life, died for our sins, and was raised on the third day so that you might stand in his perfect righteousness on the day of judgment having a righteousness not from the law but that which comes through faith in Jesus Christ.”
So, when you hear that in those stark terms and you hear the message we’ve been looking at week after week, there is a question that necessarily comes to our minds. That question goes something like this: “If no man is justified before God by doing what God has commanded in the law, and if the law requires perfect obedience which no man can perform so that men are only cursed by the law, then why did God ever give the law?” You see, you can only hear that no man is justified by doing the works of the law but only by faith in Christ so many times before you then want to ask, “Then what good is the law? Why did God give it?” Why did God give so many commands when if a man set out to do all of them so that he might be approved of by God and justified before him that man would only end up being declare guilty of his sin of not keeping the whole law and thrown into hell? That is the question I want to answer this morning.
And the reason I want to answer it is no just because I know a number of you all have been asking that question. The reason I want to answer it this morning is because the text we’re looking at this morning asks it. We’re turning our attention this morning, as we continue to study the book of Galatians, to 3:15-25, and right in the middle of these verses, Paul asks in verse 19, “Why then the law?”
But before Paul answers this question specifically on what positive roll the law played in God’s plan of redemption, Paul tells us a number of things the law was not given to do and some ways in which the law reveals that it was never intended for certain purposes. Therefore, this morning, I want us to see what Paul says in answering the question, “Why then did God give the law?” And it’s my prayer that as we see that, that our hearts will grow in our love and delight in the gospel.
Thus, in dealing with the purpose of the law, Paul first wants his readers to see that the law was not given in order to alter the promise God made to Abraham.
I mentioned this last week, but it is very likely that Paul’s opponents would have said something like, “Paul, you’re right. Abraham was justified by faith as he believed that God would fulfill the promises he made to him, but then God brought along Moses and gave him the law. Therefore, the law is something God gave to add to faith, something to add to the covenant God made with Abraham. Just as God reveals more of his truth as redemptive history unfolds, so he showed us the necessity of faith for justification through Abraham and then showed us the necessity of obedience to (at least) portions of what the law commands through Moses.”
So, Paul wants to show the impossibility of that suggestion. He wants his readers to know that God would never come along later and alter the promise God made to Abraham. He writes, “To give a human example, brother: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. . . . 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. For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise” (15-18).
First, Paul says, consider the nature of covenants than men make. It’s not as if you can make a covenant with someone and then come along later and alter the terms to it. For example, I couldn’t sign a deal to sell my house to you for $130,000 and then come back a few years later and say, “You know, I realized that I undervalued my home, and I’ve decided to collect another $20,000 from you.” You would say, “Sorry, we signed a contact, and you cannot come along and annul it or add to it once it’s been ratified.” That’s what Paul is saying in verse 15.
But why does Paul bring that up? It’s because he wants the Galatians to see that God had already made a covenant with Abraham 430 years before the law was given that consisted in God making promises that God certainly would fulfill. Therefore [skipping verse 16 for a second], Paul says, “This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God so to make the promise void” (17).
But, we might ask, “What is Paul referring to her in talking about a previous covenant with Abraham and promises God made?” We find that answer in multiple places in the book of Genesis as God’s covenant with Abraham is addressed again and again, but I simply want us to see two of these places. First, let’s look at Genesis 12:1-3. There, we read: “Now the Lord said to Abram, ‘Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’”
Then we read in Genesis 17:4-8: “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.’”
So, we see that God promises Abraham blessing, land, and offspring. In the New Testament, we ultimately see in Romans 4:13, that the land promised is not some small strip of land in the Middle East but that God promises Abraham and his offspring the entire world as Paul writes, “For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith.” And, we know from Galatians 3:8 that the promise to bless all the nations of the earth in Abraham was a promise to justify Gentiles before God by faith because in that verse Paul writes, “And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed.’”
Therefore, Paul notes that God made a covenant with Abraham 430 years before the law came along that was full of promises. God said over and over, “I will do this. I will do that.” He was simply making promises. That was the nature of the covenant. The covenant wasn’t filled with commands like “Do this and you’ll live. Fail to abide by everything I’ve commanded you and you’ll be cursed.” No. It was simply promises made by God to Abraham and his offspring of what he will do. And, one of those promises was that God would justify people from all nations of the earth by faith. According to Galatians 3:8, that is what Paul tells us was meant by God’s promise to bless all nations in Abraham. It was a promise to justify people from every nation as they believed, as they had faith in Christ.
And because the law is of such a nature that it makes demands that must be met before one is blessed, then Paul says that these two covenants are not compatible. One is characterized by what God promised to do. The other is characterized by demands that must be met by the people if they are to be blessed. So, Paul writes in verse 18, “For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by a promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.” Therefore, the law did not come along to say the same thing as the covenant of promise because it is of a totally different nature than the covenant of promise. Nor did the law come along to alter the covenant of promise because that’s impossible to do. Not even man-made covenants can be altered or annulled after they’ve been ratified. That’s the argument of verse 15 and 17-18.
But there still is one question? Who are these offspring of Abraham that God promised to bless? Are they Abraham’s physical descendants? If so, then it seems that we’re not among this group because we’re not Jews by birth. Or, perhaps it is Abraham’s physical descendants (i.e., Jews) and those who would take on certain identity markers that Jews had such as circumcision, obeying the law, etc. But if this is the case, then it would seem that Paul is saying that though Gentiles can be justified before God, they don’t get the blessings promised to Abraham and his offspring unless they are Jews or somehow can become Jews.
So, Paul writes verse 16 to clear this up real fast. He writes, “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” (16). Paul wants us to see that there’s something particular in the language of the covenant God made with Abraham. He promised to bless Abraham’s offspring. And Paul is not oblivious to the fact that “offspring” can be plural or singular. I can use the singular “offspring” to refer to one of my children or the one group that includes multiple children. Nor is Paul saying that God did not intend to bless a multitude of people from Abraham who could rightly be called “Abraham’s offspring.” But Paul wants us to see that there is a reason why this singular term is used to represent a corporate group. The reason is that God was making a promise not to bless merely Abraham but to bless a particular offspring of Abraham, namely, Jesus Christ. So, when God was promising to bless Abraham’s offspring and to bless the nations through him and to give him the whole world, God was making that promise to one particular offspring of Abraham – Jesus Christ.
“But then,” we might ask, “didn’t God intend for many to be blessed as Abraham’s offspring?” The answer is, “Yes, he did.” But the key in showing that this blessing to the many comes from being united to this one is key because Paul is showing that Abraham’s offspring then (the multitude of people who receive the promises given to Abraham) are not those who are physical descendants of Abraham, or those who are circumcised or take on other identity markers of the Jews, or any other such thing. Rather, those who receive the promises are those united with Christ – Abraham’s offspring through whom the blessings come – and those united with Christ are those who have faith in him. Therefore, as Paul writes in Galatians 3:29, “If you are Christ’s, then, you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
Therefore, what Paul wants us to see in verses 15-18 is that God made a promise to bless Abraham by giving him and his offspring the world and that God promised to justify people from every nation as they have faith in Jesus. Furthermore, God promised to make everyone an heir of the promises God gave to Abraham who would have faith in Jesus, since all the promises come to Jesus and those who have faith in him are united to him so that what comes to them comes to him as well. Thus, the way to be justified and become an heir of the promises God made to Abraham has always been by believing in Christ. And when the law came along 430 after this covenant of promise, its intention was never to change that.
“Well, great,” we might say, “but why then did God give the law?” Well, Paul asks that question in verse 19, and he begins answering it there. But before answering it, I want us to three aspects of the law that Paul wanted his readers to see. The first is that God never gave the law in order that it might last forever. That is, Paul continues to tell us why the law was not given. It was not given in order to alter or annul the covenant of promise God made with Abraham and, second, it was not given in order to be a permanent fixture.
Notice in these verses how often Paul shows that the law was not intended to last forever. He writes in verse 19, “Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions [which I’ll explain in a bit], until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made.
So, do you see, Paul says in verse 19 that the law was given for a purpose and it was to function until the offspring should come to whom God had made the promise. And we know from verse 16 that the offspring to whom the promise was made was Jesus. Therefore, Paul wants us to see that the law was never intended to be a permanent fixture, to last forever. Rather, it was intended to remain until Jesus came, the offspring to whom God had made the promise.
We see the same thing in verses 23-24. Notice in each of these verses that the law had a function and performed a function, but that it was never meant to last forever but only until Jesus came. Paul writes in these verses, “Now before faith came [which I think is shorthand for “until Jesus came and lived, died, and rose for us” based on verses 19 and 24], we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.”
So, we know that the law was given for a specific function, which we’ll see in a bit, and that it was not given in order to last forever.
Paul also wants us to see that not only was the law given as a temporary fixture, but God also demonstrated from its inception that it was shown to be inferior to the covenant God made with Abraham.
The end of verse 19 and verse 20 sound a bit odd, and it’s hard to get exactly what Paul is saying. In fact, this week I decided to see what John Piper had said about these verses when he preached on them. So, I looked up his sermon manuscript and he had written this: “But first a brief comment about the last half of verse 19 and verse 20. It says, \"The law was ordained by angels through an intermediary. Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one.\" I am not going to deal with this because I don't know what it means. I cannot figure out how the two halves of verse 20 relate to each other. I would be happy for anyone to give me insight here.”1
So, it is perhaps daring of me to tell you what I think Paul is saying here. Nonetheless, I will do so. First, let’s look again at what he writes. He writes, “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. Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one” (19-20).
What I think he’s showing in these verses is that God was demonstrating from the inception of the law that it was inferior to the covenant of promise God had made with Abraham. And one of the ways it shows its inferiority is in its very delivering. When the law was given to God’s people, it was given through channels. Angels assisted in bringing the law to the people, but even then it didn’t come directly to them. Rather, it was given to Moses as an intermediary who then delivered it to the people. That’s what Paul is showing at the end of verse 19. Then, at the beginning of verse 20, I think Paul is merely stating the obvious here, namely, that an intermediary implies more than one. If you have an intermediary, you have more than one person involved. And that’s what you have with the giving of the law. God utilized multiple parties in the law covenant.
Then, the “but” in verse 20 shows a contrast. And the contrast is this. Though the law covenant involved many parties in order to establish the law, when God made the covenant with Abraham, the covenant characterized by promise, the one God himself came to Abraham. So, I think Paul is showing that the law from its inception was shown to be inferior because with the law, there was an intermediary and angels to deliver the law to the people, but with the covenant of promise with Abraham, there was only one party who delivered the promise, and that one party was God himself.
Third, Paul wants us to see that the law was not only intended to be temporary and shown from its inception to be inferior to the covenant of promise, but it was never intended to be in conflict with the covenant of promise because its goal was never the same. It was never intended to give life.
Now, the thought you could have at this point is that if the law covenant was a covenant of a radically different nature than the covenant of promise and was temporary and inferior, was it in conflict with the promise. Did God give the law and work against what he had done with Abraham? Did God say to Abraham, “I will bless you with life” only to come along and give another means for life, saying, “Do all my commands and live”? If so, it seems that God gave two contradictory ways of blessing his people with righteousness and life.
But, Paul answers in verse 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.” Paul says, “No, the law is not in contradiction to the promises because the intention of the law was never to do that which the promises were intended to do, namely, make one righteous and give life. So, the law is not in contradiction because its purpose was entirely different.
So, then, we ask again, “Why then the law? What is its purpose?” And, I’m going to point us to the answer Paul gives. It is this: the law was given to reveal and even increase our sin so that we might see our need for Christ and be justified by faith.
First, we see that Paul tells us in verse 19 that the law was given “because of transgressions.” Now, you could read that as Paul saying that God gave the law to restrain transgressions. That is, if it’s wrong to murder, then you make a law that says, “Don’t murder” in hopes of restraining murder. And perhaps that is what Paul is saying. But I do not think it is.
Rather, I think Paul is saying that God gave the law to reveal our sin and even increase our sin. And the reason I think Paul is saying this is because that’s what he says in Romans 5:20 and 7:7-8 and 13. First, in Romans 5:20, Paul writes, “Now the law came in to increase the trespass.” Then, in Romans 7:7-8 and 13, Paul writes, “What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, \"You shall not covet.\" But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. . . . Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.”
Paul says that the law revealed sin in him and increased it. This same reality is seen with children. You may sit and see a child playing with his toys and think all is well, and it may be at that moment. But, if the child is selfish, you can reveal that by saying something like, “Share that toy with your brother or sister, and let them have a turn.” And if there is selfishness there that commandment will reveal all kinds of selfish desires in him. In fact, such commands can increase sin and sinful desires. The child might have a number of toys on the floor and be perfectly content. You command him to share and instruct his brother to go and pick up one of the unattended to toys and start having a good time with it, and all of the sudden the child’s greed and covetousness rises and increases until he may yell at or threaten his brother for playing with a toy that the child was content to let rest a second earlier.
That’s what Paul says the law does. It reveals sin and actually increases it. If for some reason it was morally wrong to eat Mexican food and you were didn’t know it, then you’d probably sit there content and happy with me. But if I then stated the law and forbade you to eat Mexican ever again, “You’d probably not only not be happy with me and want to rebel against me, but you’d actually crave Mexican more than you did the second before I said it. Your longing for Mexican food might actually trump all other food desires.”
Paul says to us that that’s why the law was given. It was to reveal our sin and increase our sin. But why would God want to do that with the law? Paul answers in verses 22-24. He writes, “But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. Now before faith came [which again is a synonym for when Christ came], we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came in order that we might be justified by faith.”
You see, the law came to show you your sin and increase your sin so that you might see that you are imprisoned by your sin and helplessly condemned before God. It was like a judge constantly pointing out your condemnation and like one constantly noting your failures and shortcoming so that you might know you’re condemned. But it did not do this in order that you might know you will never be justified. Rather, the law was given so that you might see that there’s no hope of being justified by your works and might look to Christ in faith as your only hope.
Do you see? We ask, “If God didn’t give the commands of the law so that we might do them and be justified before them, then why would he give them?” And the answer is so that we might know without a doubt that there is no hope of being justified according to our good works. God gave us command after command, revealing and increasing our sin so that we might never think that our good works could ever be the basis of being declared righteous before God. That’s why God gave the law!
And now that you believe, you are no longer under the law. That’s what Paul shows us in verse 25, as he writes, “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.”
If you believe in Christ this morning and have been justified by faith in him before God, then the law has had its effect. You’ve seen your hopelessness to ever be justified by doing enough good and have turned in faith to Christ as your only hope. That is good and right. Therefore, do not now put yourself back under a covenant that says, “If you want to be right before God do this command and that command, etc.” because if you do, you will only be reminded of hopeless and condemnation and your sin revealed. That’s what the law was designed to do.
And when Satan says to you, “If God didn’t want you to be righteous on the basis of obeying his commands, then he wouldn’t have given the law,” you can say, “No, Satan. Actually the whole reason he gave the law was to show me that I could never be good enough and needed to place my faith in Christ who lived perfectly for me and died to pay for my sin. And now I’m free from condemnation before God because of what Christ has done for me!”
So, as we continue to fight legalism in our lives, let us be strengthened this morning by seeing what the law was never intended to do (bring us life and righteousness) and what it was given to do (show our helplessness so that we might look to Christ and be justified by faith). Now, let’s celebrate the glory of the gospel and being justified by faith as we come to the table. Amen.