A06492:1173
Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians
A commentary of M. Doctor Martin Luther upon the Epistle of S. Paul to the Galatians first collected and gathered word by word out of his preaching, and now out of Latin faithfully translated into English for the unlearned. Wherein is set forth most excellently the glorious riches of Gods grace ...A commentarie of M. Doctor Martin Luther vpon the Epistle of S. Paul to the Galathians first collected and gathered vvord by vvord out of his preaching, and novv out of Latine faithfully translated into English for the vnlearned. Wherein is set forth most excellently the glorious riches of Gods grace ...
London: printed by Thomas Vautroullier dwelling wihtin sic, 1575London: printed by Thomas Vautroullier dvvelling vvihtin sic, 1575
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Vers. 22.23. For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by a servant, and one by a free woman. But he which was of the servant was borne after the flesh: and he which was of the free woman, was borne after the spirit.
Vers. 22.23. For it is vvrytten, that Abraham had tvvo sonnes, one by a seruaunt, and one by a free vvoman. But he vvhich vvas of the seruaunt vvas borne after the flesh: and he vvhich vvas of the free vvoman, vvas borne after the spirite.
As if he said: Ye forsake grace, Faith and Christ, and turn back again to the law: ye will be under the law, and become wise through it. Therefore I will talk with you of the law. I pray you then,1 consider the law diligently. Ye shall find that Abraham had two sons, Ismael by Hagar, and Isaac by Sarah. They were both the true sons of Abraham. Ismael was as well the true son of Abraham as Isaac was, for both came of one father, of one flesh, and of one Seed.2 What was then the difference? This maketh not the difference (sayeth Paul) that the mother of one was free, and the other bond (albeit it pertaineth to the allegory): but that Ismael which was borne of the bondwoman, was borne after the flesh, that is to say, without the promise and the word of God.3 But Isaac was not only borne of the freewoman,4 but also according to the promise. What then? Yet was Isaac notwithstanding as well borne of the seed of Abraham as Ismael was. I grant that they were both the children of one father,5 and yet notwithstanding there is a difference. For although Isaac were borne of the flesh, yet the promise went before. None observed this difference but only Paul, which he gathered out of the text of Genesis after this manner.