Galatians 3:17

Galatians 3:17 contains an inference from Galatians 3:15, in the form of a condensed restatement of the argument. It is impossible that the law should cancel the promise which was given repeatedly at least four hundred and thirty years earlier to the patriarchs, and which looked from the beginning to Christ as the proper end, so that the law is only an intervening link between the promise and its fulfilment. The words unto (with a view to) Christ (not ‘ in Christ,' as in the E. V.), are, however, omitted in the oldest MSS. and critical editions.

Now this I say. What I mean to say is this.

The law which came (so long a time as) four hundred and thirty years after (the promise). This is the exact time of the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, according to the historical statement in Exodus 12:40. In the prophetic passage (Genesis 15:13, and in Acts 7:6), the round number four hundred is given for this sojourn. The Hebrew text in both passages implies that the residence in Egypt only is meant, If Paul followed the Hebrew text, he did not include the patriarchal age from Abraham's immigration to Canaan till Jacob's emigration to Egypt, which would make about two hundred years more (630); the starting-point with him was the close of the patriarchal age, during which the promise was repeatedly given to Isaac and Jacob as well as to Abraham (hence the plural ‘promises' in Galatians 3:17; Galatians 3:21). It is quite possible, however, that the Apostle follows here as often the text of the Septuagint which differs from the Hebrew in Exodus 12:40, by including the patriarchal period in the four hundred and thirty years, and thus reducing the length of the Egyptian sojourn nearly one half: ‘The sojourning of the children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt [and in the land of Canaan], was four hundred and thirty years.' The words ‘and in the land of Canaan' are not in the Hebrew text, but are also found in the Samaritan Pentateuch. Josephus is inconsistent, and sometimes follows the one, sometimes the other chronology. The Septuagint may have inserted the explanatory clause to adapt the text to the chronological records of Egypt. But this difference in the chronology of the Greek Bible and our present Hebrew text, although very serious in a historical point of view, is of no account for the argument in hand. Paul means to say, the older an agreement the stronger is its authority. The Hebrew text would strengthen the argument.