Overview - NT View of the Law

Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. (Eccl 12.13)

Keeping God’s commandments sounds like a wonderfully appropriate thing to do – what better thing could we do than keep God’s commandments? But there’s a hard question to ask: “What are God’s commandments?” If only there were a book of Commandments in the Bible! The Mosaic Law took most of three books (Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy) to write; how much of it applies today? Most Christians would agree that some laws can’t be obeyed literally (they teach applicable principles instead), but which laws are which? Do we take the “moral” law literally and seek principles in the “civil” and “ceremonial” laws? Or do we drawn the line around the Ten Commandments? Or could it be that we should read the entire Law for principles? We’ll have to look outside of Ecclesiastes for the answer. The New Testament has much to say about the Law. The word “law” is used 194 times in the New Testament; “grace” appears 155 times, “love” 116, “righteousness 92 times and “salvation” a mere 46 times! Through most of the New Testament, “law” is used to mean “the Mosaic law. If the Law is so important to the NT writers and keeping God’s commandments is the whole duty of man, we would do well to hone our understanding of this key concept in order to understand it more precisely.

Which parts of Law are we required to obey today?

OT Background

Through Moses, God gave Israel a catalog of regulations relating to almost every aspect of life (Casillas 39). It was part of a conditional covenant. The ratification ceremony in Deuteronomy 27-28 listed blessings tied to obedience and curses tied to disobedience.

Besides regulations, the Law also contained instructions for the priesthood and the sacrificial system. Thus, the Law was all about sin: identifying it and covering it.

The Psalmists meditated on the Law and loved it (Ps. 1.1; 119.17). They did not see the Law as a spirit-crushing burden, but as God’s good revelation

The Prophets constantly rebuked Israel and Judah for forsaking the Law (Jer. 9.13- 15; Ezk. 22.6; Hos. 8.1; Hab. 1.4; Zeph. 3.4). Yet they did not seek only an external return to sacrifice and ritual, but heart-obedience (Hos. 6.4-6).

Overview of Paul’s View of the Law

Definitions

Occurrences of “Law” in Paul

Romans has the most references: 74 occurrences. Chapters 2 and 7 hold the highest concentration of “law.” Galatians has 32 occurrences, but because of its length, it’s more densely packed than Romans. I Corinthians has nine, several of which are merely introductory formula for Old Testament quotations. Philippians has 3; I Timothy has two and Ephesians has one.

Galatians

Background

Paul faced a serious problem with Judaizers in Galatia and spoke very strongly against their legalism. Consequently he does not praise the Law but argues against it in order to curb its abuse.

Works of the Law cannot justify.

We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. (Gal 2.15-16)

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us- for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree” – so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. (Gal 3.10-14)

In 2.15-16 and 3.10-14, Paul contrasts works of the Law with faith in Christ. The difference is clear: faith justifies; Law does not. In fact the Law brings a curse for anyone who does not keep its every command. Christ kept its demands and bore its curse; faith in Him justifies.

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. (Gal 3.16-17)

A second contrast appears in 3.16-17: Law vs. promise. Paul argues that because the promise to Abraham preceded the Mosaic Law by over 400 years, the promise has precedence. The Law is not in competition with the promise, however. The Law cannot provide. The Law was given “because of transgressions” until the arrival of the promised Seed.

The Law was temporary.

“The Law was our schoolmaster” is frequently misunderstood (3.24). It has no reference to “using Law to convince someone that he needs Christ” in the evangelistic context that comes to our minds all too quickly. Rather it is a statement about the Law’s temporary function as a guardian for God’s people from Sinai to Christ (Schreiner 79). The Seed of the promise (3.16) would bring life (2.20) through His Spirit (6.8). The Law was never intended to bring life. On the contrary, it revealed sin, holding Israel captive as they waited for Messiah (3.23).

The Law is slavery.

I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything. (Gal 4.1)

Paul extends the captivity idea of the “guardian” by pointing out that a son under his guardian was no better than a slave (4.1). He asks the Galatians if they wish to turn away from full sonship in Christ’s redemption to slavery under the rule of the Law. The contrast to this slavery is the filial dependence that the Spirit teaches us. Instead of bondage, we experience paternal affection from God. Paul pushes the slavery theme unmistakably farther with the Hagar-Sarah illustration (4.21-31). The Law is Hagar, flesh, and slavery; freedom is Sarah, the Spirit, and promise.

Law-keeping is falling from grace.

While in the broad sense, the Law (like all of Scripture) is evidence of God’s grace to unworthy sinners, Paul argues that a life of Law-keeping (i.e., circumcision in this context) is not a life of grace. We need righteousness: that comes through the Spirit by faith.

The Spirit leads; the Law does not control.

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (Gal 5.18)

When we are led by the Spirit, the Law is not our superior or controller (5.18). A Judaizer might combat the works of the flesh (5.19-21) with works of the Law, but Paul combats those fleshly works with the fruit of the Spirit (5.22-23). Verse 23 is often misunderstood. It does not mean “no one passes laws against love, joy, et al.” It means that the Law is not against the Spirit’s fruit.

Summary

The Law was temporary and unable to justify; in fact, it constituted slavery. Trying to keep the Law is inconsonant with grace, the Spirit’s leading, and love.

Romans

Background

We don’t have evidence of a particular struggle against Law-abuse or legalism per se in the Roman church. Paul’s mention of the Law in this book primarily has to do with how Law intersects with faith and justification. If anything, Paul is concerned to correct arrogant Gentiles (Thielman 162) and his teaching on the Law may be more favorable than in Galatia.

The Law must be done.

It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. (Rom 2.13)

The Law is not a matter of mere belief, doctrine or viewpoint; doing is required. The implication then for NT Christians is that, if the Law were still binding, it would not be binding merely in an informative way, but in a lifestyle-regulating way.

The Law condemns both Jew and Gentile.

Jews may think that possessing the Law grants them special privilege, but because they’ve “sinned under the Law [they] will be judged by the Law” (2.12). Gentiles might object that they’re not accountable to a Law they’ve never been given, but there is enough Law in their consciences to lead them to obey. Since their obedience is imperfect, they too are guilty (2.13-15). A corollary truth to this condemnation is that works of the Law do not justify anyone (3.20).

The Law was meant to increase transgressions.

The Law entered in order to increase transgressions. (5.20)

This is a surprise: we normally think about God giving revelation for a “good” reason. Here Paul explicitly states the purpose as increasing sin. This serves a larger purpose: increasing the reign of grace (5.21).

The Law does not rule over Christians.

For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. (Rom 6.14)

Surprisingly, Paul draws a parallel between the Law and sin in Rom. 6.14. Sin having no dominion is linked clearly to being not under the law. This is not a perfect parallel; sin and the Law are not interchangeable terms. The link is this: life “under the Law” produces an unavoidable awareness of “sin’s dominion.” The connecting idea between sin and the Law in this verse is authority. Paul’s point is simple: sin no longer rules over believers because the Law no longer rules over believers. Grace rules instead.

Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. (Rom 7.1-4)

This thought continues into chapter 7. Paul’s marriage-death illustration makes this point: “we are released from the Law” (7.6).

The Law is not bad.

This is an important clarification. Paul makes two very negative statements about the Law: it arouses sinful passions (7.5) and its commandments prove to be death (7.10). Those statements are immediately balanced: the Law is holy, righteous, good, and spiritual (7.12, 14). God gave the Law and there is nothing wrong with it. People have a problem with the Law because of their sin. When Law and sin get together, sin comes alive and produces death (7.13-14). Were it not for sin, keeping the Law would not be a problem in the slightest.

The Spirit takes the reins from the Law.

For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. (Rom 8.2)

Romans 8.2 presents an important contrast: the law (ruling principle) of the Spirit sets Christians free from the “Law of sin and death” (a reference to the Mosaic Law, referring back to chapter 7). This is a clear parallel to Paul’s teaching in Galatians: the indwelling Spirit rules a believer’s life, not an external code of law. This comparison highlights another contrast: “freedom” is the state of not being under Law.

Again, Paul prevents his readers from going too far in this idea of freedom. While believers are free from the Law, God has redeemed us so that the “righteous requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us” (8.4). The thing that that fulfills the Law in believers, however, is not attentiveness to the Law; it is Spirit-mindedness (8.5- 6).

Pursuing the Law cannot effect righteousness.

Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone (Rom 9.31-32)

This is the failure of the Jewish nation, according to Paul. They pursued the Law (with its essential works – 2.13) and, lacking faith, stumbled (9.31-32). This is a race metaphor (Thielman 205-6). Their problem was related to righteousness and faith. They tried to set up their own (based on pursuing works of the Law) and stumbled before they reached the finish line: Christ, who is righteousness for those with faith (10.2-4). This puts Law in perspective for the whole book. The Gospel is about righteousness through faith in Christ (1.16-17). The Jews tried for righteousness by Law-works without faith.

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. (10.4)

Summary

The Law did not produce righteousness; it exacerbated sin. Believers are not bound by the Law; they love under the Spirit’s rule.

Other Epistles

I Corinthians

To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. (9.20)

Living like those who hold the Law is appropriate if it facilitates evangelism.

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. (15.56)

The Law is sin’s power.

Ephesians

[Jesus unified Jews & Gentiles] by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, (2.15)

In order to make peace between Jews and Gentiles, the “Law of commandments expressed in ordinances” was abolished.

Philippians

Circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness, under the law blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death (3.5-10)

Paul’s Law-observance was rubbish compared to knowing Christ.

I Timothy

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted. (1.8-11)

The Law is good if used appropriately. It was laid down for sinners.

Issues with Paul’s View of the Law

Is the Law good or bad?

Paul doesn’t answer this question specifically, aside from his comments about the Law’s historically limited purpose. He does, however, call the Law good, righteous, holy, and spiritual. Perhaps a better question would be “how can Paul call the law good (Rom. 7.12) and identify it as a form of slavery that provokes sin (Gal. 4; Rom. 5.20)?”

The answer is found in the problem facing each church when Paul writes to them. The problem in Galatia was a Judaistic abuse of the Law. There was no need for Paul to tell them anything good about the Law – their problem was making too much of the Law. In Rome, however, there is no indication of rampant Jewish legalism. On the contrary, Paul addresses both Jews and Gentiles for Law-based arrogance. Some Jews were trusting the Law for their standing with God (2.12); some Gentiles were boasting that they had been grafted into God’s people because the Jews stumbled over the Law (11.11, 17). Dealing with both sides of the issue, Paul naturally points out the positive and negative aspects of the Law.

Do we keep the Law today?

Paul finds value in the Law. He quotes verses from the legal portions of the Pentateuch at least ten times without “disclaimers.” Yet he never does so in a way that would constitute a literal application of that regulation to the believer’s life. Instead, he argues his point based on what that law reveals about God’s timeless character (e.g., Dt. 25.4; cf. I Cor. 9.9; I Tim. 5.18). The Law serves today as a paradigm: it teaches what holiness looked like for the Israelites in their cultural and historical context (Casillas 53-54). As such, it reveals principles and truths about God’s character which modern believers can apply in their own life contexts.

The Mosaic Law no longer has a regulative role in the believer’s life. Its function was specific to the time between Sinai and Christ (Gal. 3.24). Its works cannot justify anyone (Gal. 2.15-16; Rom. 9.31-32). Paul repeatedly tells Christians that they are not under law (Rom. 6.14; 8.2; Gal. 5.18). Instead, the Spirit reigns in the believer’s life (Rom. 8.2- 6; Gal. 5.18, 22-23). The entire Law is fulfilled by loving (Rom. 13.10; Gal. 5.14).

Incidentally, the actions of a Spirit-led, loving believer will look like obedience to the moral regulations of the Law, but the Spirit is the controlling factor, not the written Mosaic code.

What good was the Law?

What can we gain from the Law?

We don’t need the Law.

The Law is good for:

The NT is not a “Law.”

There is a danger today of turning the New Testament imperatives into “Law 2.0.”

Discarding any and all external statements of moral restraint would be a gross overreaction: Paul’s exhortations, Christ’s commandments (I Jn. 2.3-4; 3.22-24; 5.2-3)

The New Testament ethical statements are not merely an updated set of external regulations. Rather, life under grace is holiness with built-in power: the indwelling Spirit.