This verse presents difficulties, both in the text and in the interpretation. The textual problems center on two points: whether Hagar is in the text or not, and whether the verse starts with an additive connective, “but” or “and,” or with “for” or “because.” The omission of Hagar from the text is attested by many old and reliable manuscripts and is reflected in some translations (Jerusalem Bible “since Sinai is in Arabia”; New English Bible “Sinai is a mountain in Arabia”). It seems more likely, however, that Hagar was in the original text, and that the omission can be explained by the problems that arose out of trying to understand what Paul meant. In other words, it is much easier to explain the verse with the omission of Hagar (New English Bible “Sinai is a mountain in Arabia and it represents the Jerusalem of today”).

Assuming, then, that Hagar is part of the original text, we are confronted with the problem of interpreting it. What does Paul mean by the statement “Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia” (Revised Standard Version)? The main explanations are as follows: (1) Hagar is sometimes used to refer to Mount Sinai. This could either be because Hagar in Arabic means Mount Sinai (Twentieth Century “the word Hagar meaning in Arabia [sic] Mount Sinai”), or that Mount Sinai is called Hagar by the Arabs (New American Bible “the mountain Sinai [Hagar] is in Arabia”). (2) This could be a play on words, based on the Arab word hajar which means “stone,” and therefore corresponds to the Mosaic tablets. No translation takes this alternative. (3) It could be that Paul is simply continuing his argument in verse 24 and making the correspondence between Hagar and Mount Sinai more explicit, to make sure that the Jews will not miss the point. In this case, the relation would be understood as stands for (as in Good News Translation) or “represents.” This third point seems to be the most likely meaning.

In rendering Hagar, who stands for Mount Sinai, it is necessary in some languages to say “When one speaks of Hagar, one is speaking of Mount Sinai,” or “In these comparisons, the name for Hagar is the name for Mount Sinai.”

The addition of the phrase in Arabia also gives rise to many theories, among which are (1) Paul wants to emphasize that Mount Sinai is outside the Promised Land, accentuating the fact that the Law was given at a time when the Jews had not yet received the promise of God; (2) Paul wishes to specify Arabia as a land of slavery, thus suggesting that Hagar can only have children who are slaves; (3) Paul simply added the phrase as geographical information, to make sure that his Gentile readers will not miss the point; (4) Paul wants to emphasize that Mount Sinai is in Arabia, the land of the descendants of Ishmael. We cannot be sure as to Paul’s motives, but the third of these options seems to be the least problematic and therefore to be preferred. One should resist the temptation of reading various kinds of interpretation into a simple statement of fact.

Hagar not only stands for Mount Sinai, but she is also a figure of (literally “corresponds to”) the present city of Jerusalem. Jerusalem here should be understood as standing for the whole Jewish nation with Jerusalem as its center. The concluding phrase in slavery with all its people is literally “in bondage with her children,” with “children” rightly understood as referring to the whole Jewish people and not simply to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The connection with Hagar is clearly obvious: just as Hagar can only bear children who are slaves, so the whole Jewish system of seeking for God’s approval by means of following the Law only results in the Jews becoming slaves to the Law and not children of God. Some commentators find a double sense in this reference to Jerusalem: a Jerusalem under Roman occupation and under bondage to the Law.

Is a figure of the present city of Jerusalem may be rendered as “may also be compared to the present city of Jerusalem,” or “… to what is now the city of Jerusalem.” The introduction of the comparison may also be stated as “we can also compare Hagar to the city of Jerusalem,” with the first part of the verse rendered as an independent clause also.

The phrase in slavery with all its people may require some expansion in certain languages, for example, “Jerusalem is like a slave, and so are all of its people,” “… all of the people related to Jerusalem,” or “… all of the people who look to Jerusalem.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1976. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .