God had designed the Abrahamic covenant to find its fulfillment in Christ, and the rest of the Old Testament charts the path that God took to reach that goal—namely, Jesus Christ.

If you’ve studied the principles of Bible interpretation, you know “allegory” is a bad word. Allegory is a way of reading a text that takes the details and makes them say something other than what they appear to mean. Because the Bible is God’s Word and because the Bible tells of people, places, and events from human history, we cannot read its historical narratives allegorically. Seen in that light, “allegory” is a bad word.

Or is it?

Throughout his letter to the Galatians, the apostle Paul reviews Genesis’s account of Abraham’s life. At one point, Paul looks at how Abraham came to have two children (Ishmael and Isaac) from two different women (Hagar and Sarah). In his exposition, the apostle says something startling:

Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. (Gal. 4:24-26)

It appears Paul has done what our teachers told us not to do. He seems to have taken a historical account from the Old Testament, made it say what it didn’t say, and labeled his reading “allegory.”

Let’s take a closer look at what Paul is doing.

Galatians 4 in Context

In Galatians 4:21-23, Paul summarizes the historical details of Genesis 16-21. But beginning in verse 24, he goes beyond the text of Genesis. He relates Hagar to the Mosaic (Sinaitic) covenant in verse 25, and he relates Sarah to the Abrahamic covenant in verse 26.

Paul has already argued in Galatians 3:6-4:7 that God intended from the beginning for the Abrahamic covenant to find its fulfillment in Jesus Christ. This prepares us for what Paul does next. In verse 27, Paul quotes Isaiah 54:1.

Read More