Know: Compare and contrast the old and new covenants with Hagar and Sarah’s children and their relationships with Abraham.
Feel: Nurture attitudes of appreciation, faith, and love to God for our deliverance from sin.
Do: Depend on God’s covenant promises.
Learning Outline:
Know: Ishmael and Isaac
How did those who insisted on circumcision put themselves in the camp of the natural-born Ishmael rather than the miracle-born Isaac?
What other biblical examples illustrate our attempts at working things out on our own?
How did Abraham in this story illustrate our tendency to rely on the old rather than the new covenant?
Feel: Appreciating the New Covenant
How did the Israelites’ failure to keep their promise at Mount Sinai teach them their need to depend on God’s power?
How does feeling our great need for God’s help awaken trust and love?
Do: Children of Promise
How are we tempted to create our own children of promise, as Abraham did, rather than let God work miraculously for us?
What opposition do we face because we are children of the new, rather than the old, covenant?
Summary: Like Abraham, Hagar, and Israel at Mount Sinai, we often are tempted to try to make God’s Word come true. But not only do our own efforts not work, they also bring on tragedy. God’s grace brings blessings rather than tragedy.
Learning Cycle
STEP 1—Motivate
Key Concept for Spiritual Growth: The old covenant attitude is one of making things happen, while the new covenant attitude trusts God to bring about His purpose.
Athletes approach sports differently. There are athletes so intent on making things happen that they force the action, even to the point of cheating when and where they can.
Others “let the game come to them.” They are confident about the system or game plan instituted by their coaching staff and concern themselves only with their assigned roles in executing that plan. These athletes encounter success not because they “made things happen” or “forced the actions” but because they relied upon their coaches’ wisdom and experience, accepting their training procedures and assigned roles. This approach demands patiently trusting the coaches’ leading and being prepared to execute the coaches’ plans whenever opportunities present themselves.
God’s followers throughout history have exemplified both approaches. Ancient Israelites self-confidently declared their intention to execute God’s will perfectly. Abraham panicked because he believed that God’s game clock was expiring, and rather than patiently waiting upon the divine game plan, he took upon himself the responsibility for producing offspring. This assistance merely complicated things. Fortunately, the spiritually maturing Abraham experienced a dramatic reversal when He surrendered Isaac. This week’s study vividly contrasts these conflicting approaches to spirituality.
Consider This: What is the difference between the old covenant attitude and the new covenant attitude? How do we live the new covenant attitude?
STEP 2—Explore
Just for Teachers: Abraham makes a compelling example for both approaches to covenant keeping. Earlier he exhibited self-dependence when he took upon himself the responsibility of fulfilling God’s promise. How many well-intentioned Christians repeat that mistake? Sincerely sorrowful regarding their sinful pasts, they self-confidently declare that they will never again repeat their former behaviors, effectively saying that their willpower is sufficient to fulfill God’s promises for changed lives. Abraham’s willfulness produced Ishmael and a deeply divided household. Unfortunately, self-dependent believers likewise produce or foster similar results and divide God’s household. Later Abraham learned that self-surrender, not self-dependence, unlocks God’s storehouse of blessings.
Atop Mount Moriah, Abraham surrendered his son for sacrifice, essentially surrendering himself, regardless of the apparent consequences for his cherished dreams. Completely surrendered, Abraham was now positioned to experience God’s extravagant grace. God’s Son, prefigured by the entrapped ram, would fulfill the promise, substituting Himself for Isaac and all humanity. Renewing power belongs to Christ, not to humans.
There are second-phase Abrahams today: believers who sincerely regret their sinful behaviors, but who recognize that righteousness can never be achieved through human effort to overcome temptation but only through moment-by-moment submission to God’s leading and absolute confidence in Christ’s sacrifice. The renewed church is any group of believers who have replaced old covenant, self-confident obedience with new covenant, fully trusting obedience. Obedience is never in doubt: we will serve somebody—either self-concocted notions of righteousness or Christ as revealed throughout Scripture.
Bible Commentary
I. Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar (Review Galatians 4:21–31 and Genesis 16 with the class.)
Those among us who share modern sensitivities may become consternated with Paul’s illustration involving Hagar because it apparently blames her and Ishmael by typing them as the example of legalistic religion. What fairness can there be in castigating the powerless slave woman who had no choice about whether or not to bear her wealthy slave owner’s offspring? Making things worse, Paul elevates Abraham’s and Sarah’s relationship (the people who caused the problem) as the example of genuine righteousness! Paul’s purpose here is neither to vilify the forsaken Hagar nor enshrine the conspiring Sarah. Their regrettable household situation merely illustrates two phases of Abraham’s spiritual journey—the do-it-yourself religion phase and the later completely-trust-God phase.
Unfortunately, Abraham’s poor choices irrevocably damaged his relationship with his firstborn and introduced unnecessary tensions into his household. Certainly we should remember that it was the relationship that produced Ishmael—not Ishmael himself—that symbolized self-righteousness. It was Abraham’s self-dependence imposed upon the powerless Hagar that epitomizes self-righteousness. Hagar and Ishmael were merely victims of Abraham’s experiment with do-it-yourself religion.
Consider This: In church conflicts regarding the nature of righteousness, sometimes legalistic persons are attacked. Perhaps those who have experienced Christ’s saving grace should be more graceful to those who haven’t. Rather than castigating them, should not genuine believers exhibit more compassion toward victims of this false, but widespread, religious philosophy? How can genuine Christians oppose legalism’s self-dependent philosophy while exhibiting compassion toward the legalistic person? What can we learn from Abraham’s transformation from self-dependent, make-it-happen religion to divine dependency?
STEP 3—Apply
Thought Questions:
What attitudes regarding covenant keeping distinguish the old from the new covenant?
The ethical requirements of the old covenant remain unaltered. Adultery remains adultery; murder remains murder; sin is still wrong. Scripture nowhere suggests that commandment breaking suddenly has become acceptable. However, covenant orientation has shifted. Formerly, Israel viewed God’s covenant as a burdensome obligation. Why is keeping the covenant recognized as a joy-filled privilege under the new covenant?
Application Questions:
How can church divisions be healed without compromising with works-oriented religion?
How can self-dependent religionists be led into a faith-oriented relationship?
STEP 4—Create
Activity: Examine hymns in the church hymnal, looking for expressions of the new covenant relationship with God. Invite members to share their discoveries with others. Have each explain how their selected phrases exemplify the new covenant relationship for them.
Adjust My Preferences
Welcome! Please set your reading preferences below.
You can access this panel later by clicking the
preference icon
in the top right of the page.
Key Text: Galatians 4:26
The Student Will:
Learning Outline:
Summary: Like Abraham, Hagar, and Israel at Mount Sinai, we often are tempted to try to make God’s Word come true. But not only do our own efforts not work, they also bring on tragedy. God’s grace brings blessings rather than tragedy.
Learning Cycle
STEP 1—Motivate
Key Concept for Spiritual Growth: The old covenant attitude is one of making things happen, while the new covenant attitude trusts God to bring about His purpose.
Athletes approach sports differently. There are athletes so intent on making things happen that they force the action, even to the point of cheating when and where they can.
Others “let the game come to them.” They are confident about the system or game plan instituted by their coaching staff and concern themselves only with their assigned roles in executing that plan. These athletes encounter success not because they “made things happen” or “forced the actions” but because they relied upon their coaches’ wisdom and experience, accepting their training procedures and assigned roles. This approach demands patiently trusting the coaches’ leading and being prepared to execute the coaches’ plans whenever opportunities present themselves.
God’s followers throughout history have exemplified both approaches. Ancient Israelites self-confidently declared their intention to execute God’s will perfectly. Abraham panicked because he believed that God’s game clock was expiring, and rather than patiently waiting upon the divine game plan, he took upon himself the responsibility for producing offspring. This assistance merely complicated things. Fortunately, the spiritually maturing Abraham experienced a dramatic reversal when He surrendered Isaac. This week’s study vividly contrasts these conflicting approaches to spirituality.
Consider This: What is the difference between the old covenant attitude and the new covenant attitude? How do we live the new covenant attitude?
STEP 2—Explore
Just for Teachers: Abraham makes a compelling example for both approaches to covenant keeping. Earlier he exhibited self-dependence when he took upon himself the responsibility of fulfilling God’s promise. How many well-intentioned Christians repeat that mistake? Sincerely sorrowful regarding their sinful pasts, they self-confidently declare that they will never again repeat their former behaviors, effectively saying that their willpower is sufficient to fulfill God’s promises for changed lives. Abraham’s willfulness produced Ishmael and a deeply divided household. Unfortunately, self-dependent believers likewise produce or foster similar results and divide God’s household. Later Abraham learned that self-surrender, not self-dependence, unlocks God’s storehouse of blessings.
Atop Mount Moriah, Abraham surrendered his son for sacrifice, essentially surrendering himself, regardless of the apparent consequences for his cherished dreams. Completely surrendered, Abraham was now positioned to experience God’s extravagant grace. God’s Son, prefigured by the entrapped ram, would fulfill the promise, substituting Himself for Isaac and all humanity. Renewing power belongs to Christ, not to humans.
There are second-phase Abrahams today: believers who sincerely regret their sinful behaviors, but who recognize that righteousness can never be achieved through human effort to overcome temptation but only through moment-by-moment submission to God’s leading and absolute confidence in Christ’s sacrifice. The renewed church is any group of believers who have replaced old covenant, self-confident obedience with new covenant, fully trusting obedience. Obedience is never in doubt: we will serve somebody—either self-concocted notions of righteousness or Christ as revealed throughout Scripture.
Bible Commentary
I. Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar (Review Galatians 4:21–31 and Genesis 16 with the class.)
Those among us who share modern sensitivities may become consternated with Paul’s illustration involving Hagar because it apparently blames her and Ishmael by typing them as the example of legalistic religion. What fairness can there be in castigating the powerless slave woman who had no choice about whether or not to bear her wealthy slave owner’s offspring? Making things worse, Paul elevates Abraham’s and Sarah’s relationship (the people who caused the problem) as the example of genuine righteousness! Paul’s purpose here is neither to vilify the forsaken Hagar nor enshrine the conspiring Sarah. Their regrettable household situation merely illustrates two phases of Abraham’s spiritual journey—the do-it-yourself religion phase and the later completely-trust-God phase.
Unfortunately, Abraham’s poor choices irrevocably damaged his relationship with his firstborn and introduced unnecessary tensions into his household. Certainly we should remember that it was the relationship that produced Ishmael—not Ishmael himself—that symbolized self-righteousness. It was Abraham’s self-dependence imposed upon the powerless Hagar that epitomizes self-righteousness. Hagar and Ishmael were merely victims of Abraham’s experiment with do-it-yourself religion.
Consider This: In church conflicts regarding the nature of righteousness, sometimes legalistic persons are attacked. Perhaps those who have experienced Christ’s saving grace should be more graceful to those who haven’t. Rather than castigating them, should not genuine believers exhibit more compassion toward victims of this false, but widespread, religious philosophy? How can genuine Christians oppose legalism’s self-dependent philosophy while exhibiting compassion toward the legalistic person? What can we learn from Abraham’s transformation from self-dependent, make-it-happen religion to divine dependency?
STEP 3—Apply
Thought Questions:
Application Questions:
STEP 4—Create
Activity: Examine hymns in the church hymnal, looking for expressions of the new covenant relationship with God. Invite members to share their discoveries with others. Have each explain how their selected phrases exemplify the new covenant relationship for them.