The Yoke of Bondage

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. (Gal 5:1)

The word, “bondage,” is often associated with slavery. Because of this, some people have concluded that when Paul speaks of “the yoke of bondage,” here in Galatians, Paul is cautioning the Galatians to not become entangled again with sin. Not surprisingly, I first heard this interpretation from a feast-keeper. Of course, those who keep feasts will not accept any evidence which demonstrates that the works of the law are negative and abolished. However, when we look at how the apostle Paul uses the word, “bondage,” and especially in the book of Galatians, it becomes very clear that Paul is referring to the law, when he speaks of “the yoke of bondage.” Let us look at the passage in context:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. (Gal 5:1-4)

A yoke is an instrument which is used to bind two animals (usually oxen) together in such a way that where one goes the other is compelled to follow. A yoke is not a bad thing if it binds you to something helpful and good. When Jesus says we are to take his yoke, it is a good thing. To be bound to Jesus in such a way that where he goes, we go, is a wonderful goal. However, when we are yoked so something which is harmful, or which keeps us in a place of disadvantage, then a yoke is a bad thing.

When Paul speaks of the yoke of bondage, he shows that he is referring particularly to circumcision. In fact, anybody who reads the letter to the Galatians will be aware that this was the primary issue that led to Paul writing this letter. Paul had introduced these Galatians to the gospel, they had received Christ and been baptized with the holy spirit. However, later on some Judaizers had come along and persuaded these people that Christ alone was not enough. If they wanted to be accepted by God, they also needed to be identified with the nation of the Jews by being circumcised. This letter was Paul’s response to this heretical idea.

But circumcision was not the only issue, Paul declares that if a person is circumcised then he is duty bound to keep the whole law. He is a “debtor to do the whole law.” Was Paul correct in saying this? Does it follow logically that if a person practices religious circumcision on the basis of what the law requires, then he is also obligated to observe everything else in the law? The point is, if a person feels that God requires him to practice one part of the law, there is no logical reason to exclude the rest of the law because it was God who gave the entire system of the law. He did not just give one part, he gave all of it in a package at Mount Sinai, so if observing one part of it is still necessary, that very fact means that all of it is still necessary. This is the reasoning behind Paul’s statement that if a person is circumcised, “he is a debtor to do the whole law.”

It should be evident that this principle applies to all the requirements of the law and not just circumcision. If practicing circumcision puts a person under obligation to keep all the law, then practicing any part of the law has the same consequence – it makes one obligated to keep all the law. So when Paul says, “be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage,” he is not referring only to circumcision, but to the entire system of the law with all its rituals and ceremonies.

As we look at the other verses in Galatians where Paul uses the word, “Bondage,” it becomes even more clear that Paul is using this word “bondage,” to refer to the government of the law and not to the rulership of sin.

But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: (Gal 2:3-4)

This is the first place where the word is used in the book of Galatians. Look carefully at the context and we will see that Paul is speaking about what happened when he went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas to meet with the other apostles. The purpose of the visit was to clear up the issue of whether or not Gentile Christians were still required to observe the law of Moses, including being circumcised (See Acts 15:4,5). Paul says that the people who wanted to impose these laws of Moses on the believers were “false brethren,” who wanted to bring the believers into bondage! Notice that the bondage which they were trying to impose on the people was not the bondage of sin, not the bondage of lawlessness, no, it was bondage to the requirements of the law of Moses!

Galatians 4:1-3 is another place where Paul uses this word bondage. Now that we understand his meaning when he uses the word, it is much easier to understand the point he is making in this passage.

Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: (Gal 4:1-3)

It is hard to see how people can misunderstand this passage. Paul uses the example of a child who will one day become a ruler, maybe a king or some kind of Lord. While he is still a child, he is treated like a slave. Does this mean that he has to work hard like a slave? No, that is not the point Paul is making, the point is that he is not allowed to make decisions for himself and to do as he likes. He is under governors and teachers and he will continue in this condition until he comes of age. The father has appointed a time (maybe when he turns 21), and when that time arrives, this heir will enter into his inheritance and will no longer be treated like a child or a slave. He will be free from the governors and teachers and will then make his own decisions.

Paul says, “even so, we ….” He explains the meaning of his illustration. He is speaking of the experience of the people of God. He is speaking of “WE.” Who are the people to whom he is referring when he says, “we?” If he was referring to the Galatians, then he would have said, “you.” If we say he was referring to the Jews, then again we ask, why does he say “we,” when the Galatians were not Jews? It is clear that Paul is referring to the people of God, and that he is comparing the history of God’s dealings with his people to the history of a single person (the heir). Paul is comparing the life of a heir, to the history of God’s people.

So, God’s people at one time were “children.” In what sense were they children? They were spiritually immature and ignorant of the true nature of God and his ways. At that time they were placed under governors and tutors which Paul refers to as “elements of the world.” The question is, what were these “elements of the world,” which they were under? As long as we are faithful in interpreting the illustration of the heir, we see that as the child was under governors and tutors, so God’s people were under these elements of the world. The elements of the world correspond to the governors and tutors.

Paul says “we” were in “bondage,” (there is that word again), under these elements of the world. Now from what we have seen, whenever Paul uses the word, “bondage” in the letter to the Galatians, he is referring to the law of Moses. Does it make sense to say that this is what he is referring to here as well? Is Paul referring to the law when he says that God’s people were placed under the elements of the world? Some people are outraged at the suggestion that the laws, given by God could be referred to as “elements of the world,” but there is absolutely nothing wrong in referring to the law in this way. Look at how Paul refers to the law in the following verses:

Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. (Heb 9:1)

Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Heb 9:10)

In these two verses Paul is referring to the sanctuary and the services associated with it. In Hebrews 9:1 he refers to the sanctuary as a “worldly sanctuary,” and in verse 10 he refers to the services as “carnal ordinances.” Clearly, these ceremonies and rituals of the law were only “elements of the world.” They had to do only with things of this world, there was nothing eternal or spiritual in the law. It concerned interaction with things of this planet and so were elements of the world. This is what God gave to his people at Mount Sinai because they were spiritual children. They were not yet prepared for the responsibilities of adulthood.

Notice that this is exactly what Paul said in the previous chapter of Galatians, chapter 3:

But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. (Gal 3:23-25)

Paul says that before Christ came, before the faith of Jesus became a reality, we, the people of God, were kept under a schoolmaster (the same tutors and governors referred to in chapter 4). Now he says plainly that the schoolmaster was the law. This is what he refers to as “elements of the world,” in chapter 4. The purpose of this schoolmaster or tutor or governor, was to take us to Christ. His duty was to govern, teach, control the people of God until Christ arrived and faith became reality.

When we go back to chapter 4 we see that this arrival of Christ is the time when the child becomes an adult. It is the “time appointed of the father,” when the child is no longer to be governed by the tutors, but is able to make his own decisions. So Paul says very plainly,

But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. (Gal 4:4-5)

God sent his Son to deliver us from the tutors and governors who kept us as slaves. We were kept UNDER the law, UNDER the schoolmaster, UNDER the tutors and governors, UNDER the elements of the world. All these expressions refer to the same thing, they all refer to the bondage of the law. God sent his son to deliver his people from that kind of system so that God’s people, instead of being servants would now live as sons. They would enter into the inheritance appointed of the father because Christ came and his people graduated from childhood where they were treated like slaves, to the liberty of sons, where they are no longer under a schoolmaster, but are full-grown sons.

Again we see that when Paul refers to God’s people being under “bondage,” he is referring to being under the control of the law. So when we come upon the word again in Galatians 4:9, it is easy to see that he is again referring to the works of the law.

But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? (Gal 4:9)

Paul is speaking to the Galatians as members of the people of God. In making his point so far he has been saying, “we.” It is clear that he is including himself in the points he has been making so he is speaking of the people of God as a whole. He has been looking at the history and development of God’s people from the time of Moses on down through the coming of Christ to the present. But now, instead of saying “we,” he changes and says, “ye.” Now he is referring only to the Galatians and their problem, he is not included. He says they are again turning to the “weak and beggarly elements,” and wanting to return to bondage.

Now some argue that the Galatians must have been turning back to pagan practices because Paul says they were turning “again,” this means that they were going back to something they had once done. As I examine the passage carefully, I have to disagree. There is really no indication anywhere else in this book that the Galatians have any problem other than a desire to practice the works of the law. In fact, Paul says it very clearly just a few verses later:

Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? (Gal 4:21)

He makes it clear that what the Galatians desired was to be under the law, to be governed by the law, to be under the schoolmaster. They were not desiring to return to pagan practices, they were desiring to be equal to their Jewish brethren by adopting their observance of the law.

Paul is again speaking to the Galatians as people of God. Now they (being now God’s people) want to turn back to the way of the law, the weak and beggarly elements (elements of the world). They, as Gentiles were never under the law, but Paul is speaking to them as a part of the people of God who, as a whole, were once under the law. So they, as the people of God are turning again to that old way.

To illustrate my point, I am a Jamaican in my physical nature. As a Jamaican I can say our people were once under the rule of the British government. But I am also one of the people of God and as a child of God I can say, my people were once slaves in Egypt. As one of the children of God I might be said to be returning to the way of the law if I should start circumcising my children. I would be said to be “returning” to that way, even though as a Jamaican, my people never practiced it. It depends on whether I am speaking of myself as a child of God, or as a Jamaican. I have two identities and therefore two histories. It is the same with the Galatians, they had two identities and two histories. The question is, which identity is Paul addressing when he says that they were “turning again to the weak and beggarly elements?”

Up to this point, he has been viewing them as members of God’s people, he has been tracing their history as a part of the people of God. There is absolutely no reason to believe that he has changed his perspective here. In fact there is strong reason to conclude that he is continuing to see them in the same way as before. He speaks of them seeking to be in “bondage,” which, as we have seen, refers to being under the law. He refers to them turning to the “weak and beggarly elements,” and he has already identified the law as being, “elements of the world.” Now he simply adds the words, “weak and beggarly.”

There is absolutely no problem in seeing the law as weak and beggarly. All that it means is that the law had nothing to offer, it was weak, and it was helpless to make the people any better. The word translated as “beggarly,” simply means to be poor and to have nothing to offer. This exactly describes how effective the law is in helping us to obtain what we need. It was weak and helpless.

For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Heb 7:19)

And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. (Acts 13:39)

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (Rom 8:3)

Finally, we will look at one more passage in Galatians where the word “bondage” is used and not surprisingly, it again refers very plainly to the bondage of the law.

In Gal 4:22-31, Paul uses the illustration of Sarah and her son Isaac, and Hagar and her son Ishmael. He says that these two women with their sons, represent the two covenants. Hagar and Ishmael represent the covenant of the flesh, while Sarah and Isaac represent the covenant of the spirit.

Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. (Gal 4:24-26)

Notice, he says the covenant from Mount Sinai (the law) “gendereth to bondage,” or gives birth to bondage. Furthermore, earthly Jerusalem (which operated on the basis of the law) is in bondage with her children. Again Paul is emphasizing that if the Galatians seek after Sinai, or the practices of Jerusalem, what they are doing is putting themselves back under the system of the old covenant, and the end result will be bondage. Let us take heed, the same thing remains true today.

(Source: Restoration Ministry)