Galatians 4: Sons and Heirs, Paul’s Concern, and Hagar and Sarah
4:1–7 Sons and heirs
What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he is the owner of everything. He is subject to guardians and trustees until the date set by his father. So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world. But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!” So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God. (BSB)
Says Paul continues from the heirship of 3:29. “as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he is the owner of everything”. He is “subject to guardians and trustees until the date set by his father”. The Greek names ἐπιτρόπους (epitropous, “guardians”) and οἰκονόμους (oikonomous, “stewards”), and the limit is τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός (tēs prothesmias tou patros, “the appointed time of the father”). The household setting, and the pointer back to the guardian of 3:24–25, are treated in Guardians, trustees, and the heir (4:1–2), The paidagogos (3:24–25) and Under a guardian until Christ. The wording of 4:1–3 is treated in The heir as a child, and the stoicheia (4:1–3).
Says The application follows: “So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world”. The Greek is ὑπὸ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (hypo ta stoicheia tou kosmou, “under the stoicheia of the world”). The BSB’s “basic principles” is an English rendering, not a claim that the Greek is already decided.
Uncertain What the stoicheia are is open. Calvin, on 4:3, writes, “Elements may either mean, literally, outward and bodily things, or, metaphorically, rudiments. I prefer the latter interpretation.” Lightfoot, on 4:3, writes, “fathers (Jerome, Gennadius, Primasius) adopt the other sense, ‘elementary teaching.’ This is probably the correct interpretation,” Burton, more guardedly, paraphrases 4:9: “to return to those weak and beggarly rudimentary teachings under which they formerly were,” Luther writes that Paul “speaketh here even of the law of God, which he calleth the elements or rudiments of the world:” Wesley, also guarded, writes of life “under the typical Observances of the Law, which were like the first Elements of Grammar, the A B C of Children:” These are their readings; no verdict is given. The language evidence is in The heir as a child, and the stoicheia (4:1–3).
Says “when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law”, “to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons”. The Greek marks the moment as τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (to plērōma tou chronou, “the fullness of the time”), and the sending as ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ (exapesteilen ho theos ton huion autou, “God sent forth his Son”), with the two participles γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον (genomenon ek gynaikos genomenon hypo nomon, “born of a woman, born under the law”). The aim is τὴν υἱοθεσίαν (tēn huiothesian, “the adoption as sons”). The wording is treated in The fullness of time, and born of a woman (4:4–5) and υἱοθεσία.
Implies The Son is sent as one who is already the Son, and he is placed in a true human birth and under the law, in order to redeem those under the law. Adoption and heirship are also treated in Led by the Spirit: adoption, "Abba! Father!", the Spirit's witness, and heirs with Christ (Romans 8:14–17) and τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ζωή … πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας … Αββα ὁ πατήρ (8:9–17).
Says “And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”” The printed text has εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν (eis tas kardias hēmōn, “into our hearts”); RP 2018 and the TR read ὑμῶν (see ἡμῶν / ὑμῶν). The cry is Αββα ὁ πατήρ (Abba ho patēr, “Abba, Father”), treated in Abba, Father, and heir through God (4:6–7) and αββα. “So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God”. The printed text has διὰ θεοῦ (dia theou, “through God”); RP 2018 and the TR read θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ (see διὰ θεοῦ / θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ).
Implies In one act God, his Son, and the Spirit of his Son are each named, and the result is sonship and inheritance through God, not slavery. The same movement from slave to son is already in view at the end of chapter 3 (Sons, heirs and one in Christ).
Says The opening illustration is deliberately modest. The heir is already “the owner of everything”, yet for a time he “is no different from a slave”. The difference is not in what will one day be his, but in his present subjection “until the date set by his father”. Paul then says “when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world”, so that the child-heir and the stoicheia occupy the same span of time, the time before the fullness of the time. Nothing in 4:1–3 yet names the Son; the illustration waits for 4:4–5 to say how the father’s date arrives.
Implies Because the limit is “the date set by his father”, and because 4:4 names the moment as the fullness of the time when God sent his Son, the text presents the move from childhood under the stoicheia to sonship as God’s act, not the heir’s.
Says The two purpose clauses of 4:5 should be read together: the Son is sent “to redeem those under the law”, and “that we might receive our adoption as sons”. Redemption and adoption are not two unrelated errands. Those under the law are the ones who receive the adoption. The Spirit is then sent “because you are sons”, not in order that they might become sons, and the Spirit’s cry is ““Abba, Father!”” The argument of 4:6–7 therefore rests on a gift already given: sonship first, then the Spirit in the heart, then the conclusion that the son is “an heir through God”. Whether the pronoun in 4:6 is “our” or “your,” and whether 4:7 reads “through God” or “of God through Christ,” is treated in ἡμῶν / ὑμῶν and διὰ θεοῦ / θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ; on either reading of 4:6 the Spirit is sent into the hearts of God’s sons, and on the printed text of 4:7 the heirship is through God.
4:8–20 Paul’s concern for the Galatians
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you are turning back to those weak and worthless principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that my efforts for you may have been in vain. I beg you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. You know that it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. And although my illness was a trial to you, you did not despise or reject me. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus Himself. What then has become of your blessing? For I can testify that, if it were possible, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? Those people are zealous for you, but not in a good way. Instead, they want to isolate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them. Nevertheless, it is good to be zealous if it serves a noble purpose—at any time, and not only when I am with you. My children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you. (BSB)
Says The appeal turns on what they once were and what they now risk. “Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods”. “But now that you know God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you are turning back to those weak and worthless principles?” The Greek of the last phrase is τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα (ta asthenē kai ptōcha stoicheia, “the weak and poor stoicheia”). “You are observing special days and months and seasons and years!” “I fear for you, that my efforts for you may have been in vain”. The wording is treated in Known by God, and weak and worthless principles (4:8–11).
Implies Because they once served “those who by nature are not gods”, they were Gentiles before they knew God. The correction “or rather are known by God” puts the initiative with God, which makes a return to slavery the stranger.
Uncertain What the days, months, seasons and years of 4:10 were is open. Several writers take them as the calendar of the law. Calvin, on 4:10, writes, “The Jewish Sabbath, new moons, and other festivals, were earnestly pressed by the false apostles, because they had been appointed by the law.” He also writes that Paul “adduces as an instance one description of ‘elements,’ the observance of days.” Burton writes, “That the days, etc., referred to are those which the Jewish law required to be observed is made certain” Lightfoot glosses the months as “the monthly celebrations, the new moons” Chrysostom writes of teachers “preaching to them not only circumcision, but also the feast-days and new-moons.” Wesley writes, “Ye observe days — Jewish sabbaths — and months — New Moons — and times — as that of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles — and years — Annual Solemnities.” These are their readings; no verdict is given. The background is treated in Not gods, and the calendar (4:8–10).
Says The tone then becomes personal. “I beg you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong”. “You know that it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you”, in the Greek δι’ ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς (di’ astheneian tēs sarkos, “because of a weakness of the flesh”). “And although my illness was a trial to you, you did not despise or reject me”; the Greek is τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου (ton peirasmon hymōn en tē sarki mou, “your trial in my flesh”). They “welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus Himself”. “What then has become of your blessing? For I can testify that, if it were possible, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me”. The wording is treated in Weakness of the flesh, and your eyes (4:12–15).
Uncertain The nature of the illness is not named in the text. Ramsay holds that it was malaria or a fever, writing of “the headache that accompanies each recurrence of chronic malaria fever” Lightfoot is guarded: he writes, “we should be tempted by the closeness of the parallel to conjecture that it was of the nature of epilepsy.” These are their readings; no verdict is given. The background is treated in Paul’s illness in Galatia (4:13–15).
Implies Because the illness was the occasion of his first preaching, and they welcomed him as an angel of God, the text presents their first reception as warm despite his weakness.
Says The contrast with the present follows. “Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?” “Those people are zealous for you, but not in a good way. Instead, they want to isolate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them” (ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς (ekkleisai hymas, “to shut you out”)). “it is good to be zealous if it serves a noble purpose—at any time, and not only when I am with you”. “My children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you” (τέκνα μου (tekna mou, “my children”); ὠδίνω (ōdinō, “I am in labor”)). “how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you”. The wording is treated in Zealous, not in a good way, and labor pains (4:16–20).
Implies Paul pictures himself as a mother in labor a second time, until Christ is formed in them.
Says The section is held together by a return and a contrast. They are “turning back to those weak and worthless principles”, wishing to be enslaved by them all over again, and they are “observing special days and months and seasons and years” after having been “slaves to those who by nature are not gods”. At the same time Paul reminds them of a first welcome: they did not despise him in his weakness, and they would have given him their eyes. The present is measured against that past. “Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?” The others “want to isolate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them”. Paul’s own zeal is of another kind: he is in labor “until Christ is formed in you”, and he is “perplexed about you”.
Implies The fear of 4:11, that his labor may have been in vain, is the same fear that makes the appeal of 4:12–20 so personal. He asks them to “become like me, for I became like you”, and he testifies that “You have done me no wrong”. The wrong, if it comes, would be a turning back, not a past injury against him.
Says The Greek of 4:9 keeps the stoicheia in view from 4:3, now called weak and poor. The BSB’s “worthless principles” is again an English rendering. How those stoicheia relate to the observances of 4:10, and how Gentile readers who once served what are not gods can be said to be turning back to them, is left open in Turning back to the principles (4:8–11) and Not gods, and the calendar (4:8–10). The point Paul himself marks is the contradiction: they “know God, or rather are known by God”, and yet they turn back.
Implies If God has known them, their standing does not begin with their observances. A return to the stoicheia would be a return to slavery after sonship has been named.
4:21–31 Hagar and Sarah
Tell me, you who want to be under the law, do you not understand what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born through the promise. These things serve as illustrations, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children into slavery: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present-day Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written: “Rejoice, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have never travailed; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband.” Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time, however, the son born by the flesh persecuted the son born by the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? “Expel the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (BSB)
Says The last movement begins with a challenge: “Tell me, you who want to be under the law, do you not understand what the law says?” “For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman” (see Gal 4:22 → Gen 16:15). “His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born through the promise” (see Gal 4:23 → Gen 21:1–2). The history of the two births is also in view in Not all Israel is Israel: Isaac, Jacob, and "God’s plan of election" (Romans 9:6–13), Rom 9:7, 9, 12: Gen 21:12; 18:10, 14; and 25:23 (MT and LXX) and Rom 9:7 → Gen 21:12.
Implies Abraham, Hagar, Sarah, Ishmael and Isaac are historical persons, and the Genesis account is history, which Paul reads.
Says “These things serve as illustrations, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children into slavery: This is Hagar”. The Greek is ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα (hatina estin allēgoroumena, “which things are allegorized”). The wording is treated in Allegoroumena, and two covenants (4:21–24) and Allegory and the Genesis history (4:24).
Uncertain What ἀλληγορούμενα means is open. Lightfoot, on 4:24, writes, “St Paul uses ἀλληγορία here much in the same sense as he uses τύπος 1 Cor. x. 11 ταῦτα δὲ τυπικῶς συνέβαινεν, not denying the historical truth of the narrative, but superposing a secondary meaning.” Chrysostom, on 4:24, writes, “Contrary to usage, he calls a type an allegory; his meaning is as follows; this history not only declares that which appears on the face of it, but announces somewhat farther, whence it is called an allegory.” Calvin, on 4:24, writes, “Paul certainly does not mean that Moses wrote the history for the purpose of being turned into an allegory, but points out in what way the history may be made to answer the present subject.” Wesley is more guarded: “For these two Sons are types of the two Covenants.” Lightfoot, in his paraphrase of 4:21–27, also writes, “These things may be treated as an allegory. The two mothers represent two covenants.” These are their readings; no verdict is given.
Says “Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present-day Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children”. The Greek order is Σινᾶ ὄρος (Sina oros, “Sinai, a mountain”); the BSB has “Mount Sinai”. SBLGNT prints τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ (to de Hagar Sina oros estin en tē Arabia, “now Hagar is Sinai, a mountain in Arabia”); editions differ on the particle and on whether the name Hagar stands in the clause (see τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ). She συστοιχεῖ (systoichei, “corresponds”) to τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ (tē nyn Ierousalēm, “the present Jerusalem”). The wording is treated in Hagar, Sinai, and the Jerusalem above (4:25–27).
Uncertain Why Hagar is linked with Sinai in Arabia is open. Chrysostom, on 4:25, writes, “The bond-woman was called Hagar, and ‘Hagar’ is the word for Mount Sinai in the language of that country.” Burton is guarded: he writes, “Or he may have had in mind that there is an Arabic word, ḥagar, which may be reproduced in Hebrew” and, further, “it is possible that the word may have been applied by the Arabs to that particular mountain which in Paul’s day was regarded as the scene of the giving of the law.” These are their readings; no verdict is given. The background is treated in Hagar, Sinai in Arabia, and Jerusalem (4:24–26).
Uncertain The wording of 4:25 is itself open. Lightfoot holds that the shorter reading, without the name, is original. He writes, “I have endeavoured to show that ‘Hagar’ ought to be expelled from the text on the ground of external authority alone.” On that reading, he writes, “If the word Hagar be omitted, the passage is capable of a very easy and natural interpretation; ‘Sinai,’ St Paul argues, ‘is situated in Arabia, the country of Hagar’s descendants, the land of bondslaves.’” Burton takes the other side, the longer reading which the BSB follows: he writes, “But since without Ἅγαρ there would be no occasion to insert ὅν, the probability is that Ἅγαρ has fallen out, and that the testimony of ℵ is really in favour of the presence of Ἅγαρ in the text.” These are their readings, set side by side; no verdict is given. The unit is τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ.
Says “But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother”. “For it is written: “Rejoice, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have never travailed; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband.”” (see Gal 4:27 → Isa 54:1).
Uncertain What the Jerusalem above is is open. Lightfoot, in his paraphrase of 4:21–27, writes, “The other answers to the heavenly Jerusalem, which is free—I mean the Church of Christ, our common mother.” Chrysostom, on 4:26, writes, “Thus the type of the Jerusalem below was Hagar, as is plain from the mountain being so called; but of that which is above is the Church.” Calvin, on 4:26, writes, “The Jerusalem which he calls above, or heavenly, is not contained in heaven; nor are we to seek for it out of this world; for the Church is spread over the whole world,” Wesley speaks more guardedly of “the mother of us all: that is, all we who believe in Christ, are free Citizens of the New Jerusalem.” These are their readings; no verdict is given. The exegetical note is Two women and two covenants (4:21–27).
Says “Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise”. SBLGNT prints ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐστέ (hymeis de adelphoi kata Isaak epangelias tekna este, “you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise”); WH, RP 2018 and the TR read ἡμεῖς … ἐσμέν (see ὑμεῖς … ἐστέ / ἡμεῖς … ἐσμέν). “At that time, however, the son born by the flesh persecuted the son born by the Spirit. It is the same now” (see Gal 4:29 → Gen 21:9). “But what does the Scripture say? “Expel the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”” (see Gal 4:30 → Gen 21:10). “Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman”. The wording is treated in Children of promise, and expel the slave woman (4:28–31) and Children of the free woman (4:28–31).
Implies Children of promise, as Isaac was, are sons of the free woman and heirs, not slaves.
Uncertain How the persecution of 4:29 relates to Genesis 21:9 is open. Genesis, in the BSB, says that Hagar’s son “was mocking her son”. Lightfoot writes that “the word seems to mean ‘mocking, jeering’;” Chrysostom, on 4:29, writes, “Isaac, who was free, was persecuted by Ishmael the bondman.” Calvin writes, “by this participle he intimates that Ishmael ridiculed his brother Isaac.” and, further, “There cannot then be a doubt that he maliciously endeavoured to provoke the child Isaac by reproachful language.” Burton is more guarded: he writes, “The persecution of Isaac probably refers to Gen. 21⁹, and the traditions that had gathered about it, but the apostle may also have had in mind the mutual hostility of the nations supposed to have descended from the two brothers.” Lightfoot, also guarded, writes that the aggressions of the Arab tribes on the Israelites “were the antitype to Ishmael’s mockery of Isaac.” These are their readings; no verdict is given. Whether Paul also drew on traditions beyond Genesis is treated in Early readings of Galatians 4: the persecution of 4:29.
Says The two women and the two covenants are not a second gospel beside 4:1–7. Those who “want to be under the law” are asked to hear what the law itself says. Abraham had two sons, and they were born in two ways: “according to the flesh” and “through the promise”. Hagar’s covenant is from Sinai and “bears children into slavery”; the present Jerusalem “is in slavery with her children”. Against that stands “the Jerusalem above”, who “is free, and she is our mother”. The Scripture of 4:30 then speaks: the slave woman’s son “will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son”. The last word of the chapter is therefore not a new command but a conclusion already reached in 4:7: “we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman”.
Implies Because 4:30 is introduced as what the Scripture says, and because 4:22–23 begin from what is written of the two sons, Paul reads Genesis as history and as God’s word, and he reads the Galatians’ present in its light. “It is the same now”: the persecution is not left in the past. The inheritance belongs to the children of the promise, like Isaac, whether 4:28 is read as “you are” or “we are” (see ὑμεῖς … ἐστέ / ἡμεῖς … ἐσμέν).
Says Isaiah 54:1 is brought in as “For it is written”, in support of the barren woman who is yet a mother of many. The English display texts of Galatians and of Isaiah differ in their opening verbs, as Gal 4:27 → Isa 54:1 notes; the citation still stands as Scripture’s word over the Jerusalem above and her children. No form of a Greek Old Testament is claimed here.
Implies The contrast of the two Jerusalems is moral and covenantal in the text itself: one is in slavery with her children, the other is free and is our mother. What further identification the Jerusalem above receives from later readers is left where 4:26 left it, with the holdings named above and in Two women and two covenants (4:21–27), and with no verdict.
Two women and two covenants (4:21–27)
Allegory and the Genesis history (4:24)
Children of the free woman (4:28–31)
Minor variants
The printed text is SBLGNT. Four units have their own notes: ἡμῶν / ὑμῶν (4:6 ἡμῶν / ὑμῶν), διὰ θεοῦ / θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ (4:7 διὰ θεοῦ / θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ), τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ (4:25 τὸ δὲ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Ἁγὰρ Σινᾶ / τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ), and ὑμεῖς … ἐστέ / ἡμεῖς … ἐσμέν (4:28 ὑμεῖς … ἐστέ / ἡμεῖς … ἐσμέν). The remaining differences, from the SBLGNT apparatus compared with RP 2018, are noted here only. 4:3 ἤμεθα (SBLGNT) / ἦμεν (RP). 4:8 φύσει μὴ (SBLGNT) / μὴ φύσει (RP). 4:9 δουλεύειν (SBLGNT, with RP) / δουλεῦσαι (WH, Treg). 4:14 ὑμῶν (SBLGNT) / μου τὸν (RP). 4:15 ποῦ … οὖν … ἐξορύξαντες (SBLGNT) / Τίς … + ἦν … + ἂν (RP). 4:18 δὲ (SBLGNT) / + τὸ (RP). 4:19 τέκνα … μέχρις (SBLGNT) / τεκνία … ἄχρι (RP). 4:23 δι’ (SBLGNT) / διὰ τῆς (RP). 4:25, after the opening unit, γὰρ (SBLGNT) / δὲ (RP) in the later clause. 4:26 μήτηρ (SBLGNT) / + πάντων (RP). 4:30 κληρονομήσει (SBLGNT) / κληρονομήσῃ (RP). 4:31 διό (SBLGNT) / Ἄρα (RP). No further verdict is given on these box lines.
The chapter therefore runs from the child-heir under guardians to sonship and inheritance through God, from a warning not to turn back to the stoicheia to a personal appeal, and from the history of Abraham’s two sons to the children of the free woman. God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption as sons, and he sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying Abba, Father. The one who is a son is an heir through God, no longer a slave. The readers once served those who by nature are not gods; now, knowing God, or rather being known by God, they are asked why they turn back to weak and poor stoicheia and observe days and seasons. Paul reminds them of the illness through which he first preached, of their first welcome, and of his labor until Christ is formed in them. He then reads what is written of Abraham’s two sons: one born according to the flesh, one through the promise; two covenants; Sinai and the present Jerusalem in slavery; the Jerusalem above, who is free and is our mother; children of promise, like Isaac; and the Scripture that expels the slave woman and her son. Therefore we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. Where careful readers differ — on the stoicheia, the observances, the illness, the force of ἀλληγορούμενα, the name of Hagar at Sinai, the wording of 4:25, the Jerusalem above, the mocking of Genesis 21:9, and the traditions that later gathered around that scene — their holdings have been named, attributed, and left open. No application is drawn from those open points.