Understanding Romans 7

[zippy2006]

There are two basic themes in Romans 7 that trip me up. The first concerns Romans 7:1-6. What does it mean to die to the law? To live in the Spirit and not to serve the law?

The second concerns Romans 7:7-20, but especially this passage:

But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. (Romans 7:8-12)​

How does sin lie dead apart from the law? Is it because of something like invincible ignorance? To me it seems like sin is evil and destructive by its very nature, and would wreak havoc with or without the law. And if sin is really dead apart from the law, then it would seem that the law is responsible for bringing death just as much as sin is, despite what Paul says in verse 13. How is it that "sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me."

Thanks in advance!

 

[MWood]

There are two basic themes in Romans 7 that trip me up. The first concerns Romans 7:1-6. What does it mean to die to the law? To live in the Spirit and not to serve the law?

The second concerns Romans 7:7-20, but especially this passage:

But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. (Romans 7:8-12)​

How does sin lie dead apart from the law? Is it because of something like invincible ignorance? To me it seems like sin is evil and destructive by its very nature, and would wreak havoc with or without the law. And if sin is really dead apart from the law, then it would seem that the law is responsible for bringing death just as much as sin is, despite what Paul says in verse 13. How is it that "sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me."

Thanks in advance!

You remember that Paul also wrote that, "where there is no law there is no sin." Sin brings death because of the law. Before the law everyone sinned but those sins are not accounted to those that were not under the law, because there was no law. The same with Paul, he didn't know sin until he understood the law, then he knew that he was dead because of his sins. When he understood the law he quit his sinning and became alive because of the law. My best take on this.

 

[klutedavid]

There are two basic themes in Romans 7 that trip me up. The first concerns Romans 7:1-6. What does it mean to die to the law? To live in the Spirit and not to serve the law?

The second concerns Romans 7:7-20, but especially this passage:

But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. (Romans 7:8-12)​

How does sin lie dead apart from the law? Is it because of something like invincible ignorance? To me it seems like sin is evil and destructive by its very nature, and would wreak havoc with or without the law. And if sin is really dead apart from the law, then it would seem that the law is responsible for bringing death just as much as sin is, despite what Paul says in verse 13. How is it that "sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me."

Thanks in advance!

Hello Zippy.

The answer lies between the two sections you quoted.

Romans 7
4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ,
so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that
we might bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which
were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.
6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound,
so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Why so many struggle with the letter to the Romans, is that Paul is addressing the Jews in
the church at Rome (Romans chapters 2-11). Therefore, Paul is discussing the law often, which Paul
does not do in the other letters to Gentile churches. Romans is an extremely difficult letter
to understand, unless you notice who Paul is really addressing.

How does sin lie dead apart from the law?

The law identifies what sin is, though sin is not imputed where there is no law. Without the
law, one is ignorant to some extent of what sin is. Sin loses it's power when the law is absent.
The law condemns anyone who cares to read it. The letter of the law is a death penalty.

With the law a person should realizes how far short they fall from being righteous. This
is the purpose of the law, to kill, to render someone open to the need of salvation. Hence,
Paul states, I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin
became alive and I died. Thus, having no law means a reduced awareness of sin, no real
need of salvation.

To me it seems like sin is evil and destructive by its very nature, and would
wreak havoc with or without the law.

Everyone was under the law of sin and death regardless, your correct. So Israel represented
mankind to some extent, they transgressed profoundly against God. So the Christ was
sent specifically to Israel first, because God chose Israel to reveal His Son. That is why
Paul goes to great lengths in this letter, in explaining the downfall of Israel.

And if sin is really dead apart from the law, then it would seem that the law is
responsible for bringing death just as much as sin is, despite what Paul says in verse 13.
How is it that "sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed
me."

The law amplifies sin, the law increases sin, but where sin increases then Grace increases
also. Hence, God chose Israel and placed them under the law. This amplified sin and God
dealt with Israel's overflowing sin, by sending His Son to die for the nation of Israel. The
secondary consequence of Christ's death, is salvation for the Gentiles.

Paul was deceived by the commandment, because people think that if they obey the
law. They will be saved because they are good people. The truth is that the law
announces in detail, why no one can be saved through the law. This aspect of the
law is deceptive, it deceived Paul.

Romans is really all about Israel, the law, and God's reconciliation in Christ.

 

[zippy2006]

Hello Zippy.

Hello and thanks for your reply. What you wrote makes good sense.

I guess a related question I have is, "Why give the law, then?" If sin is dead and powerless apart from the law, then why give sin life and power via the law?

It seems to me that perhaps Paul is using hyperbole when he says that sin is dead apart from the law. Or else--for he says that those without the Mosaic Law have a law written on their hearts by which they will be judged--being "apart from the law" is purely theoretical and never happens in reality.

You say that the law amplifies or increases sin, and that makes sense to me. But it seems a bit different from what Paul says about sin being dead or nonexistent apart from the law. Again, perhaps this is just hyperbole?

 

[mark kennedy]

You remember that Paul also wrote that, "where there is no law there is no sin." Sin brings death because of the law. Before the law everyone sinned but those sins are not accounted to those that were not under the law, because there was no law. The same with Paul, he didn't know sin until he understood the law, then he knew that he was dead because of his sins. When he understood the law he quit his sinning and became alive because of the law. My best take on this.

Understand Paul has several arguments running concurrently, the primary vein is the need for grace, for that you must be convicted for sin. The law never provided righteousness, it bears witness to a righteousness that is by faith. What the law did, according th Paul's example, it says not to covet so being rebellious it conjures up all kinds of courteous desire. Pay special attention to the transition starting about Rom. 3:20, the is a crucial ' but now',

This section from about the sixth chapter to the eighth is predicated on 'What shall we say', which means what should we teach. Paul is talking to a Jewish audience many of whom were probably converted at Pentecost. Paul brings up the law because they thought keeping the law was righteousnes. What he is saying is Jew and Gentile are sinners in need of Christ.

 

[RDKirk]

Why so many struggle with the letter to the Romans, is that Paul is addressing the Jews in
the church at Rome (Romans chapters 2-11). Therefore, Paul is discussing the law often, which Paul
does not do in the other letters to Gentile churches. Romans is an extremely difficult letter
to understand, unless you notice who Paul is really addressing.

Let me speak to that point, which is significant.

Paul is speaking to three groups of people in the letter to the Romans, and he's also fulfilling an overarching purpose.

A unique thing had happened to the congregation at Rome. At some time earlier, in the 40s AD, Priscilla and Aquila and other Christian Jews had organized that congregation in Rome along with gentiles. Perhaps they came from Antioch, we don't know. But we do know that in 49 AD, Emperor Claudius expelled the Jews--including the Jewish Christians--from Rome leaving only the gentile Christians to continue without them (Claudius' expulsion of the Jews order also directly affected the Roman colony of Philippi--which is why there were no Jews in Philippi when Paul reached it).

In 53 AD, the new Emperor Nero permitted the Jews to return to Rome--Aquila and Priscilla with them to rejoin the Roman congregation. But remember that the gentile Christians had been carrying on without the Jewish Christians for several years...so things would not be as they had been.

In the letter to the Romans, part of the letter is specifically to the Jewish members about the gentile members, part of the letter is specifically to the gentile members about the Jewish members, and part of it is to them as a groups.

In addition, Paul had not been to Rome and wasn't sure he would get there, so he had put together all his synagogue debates into one package for them. I didn't recognize this pattern of rhetoric until after I'd studied some of the classical Greek philosophers to see that they wrote in a similar fashion--Paul is "being Greek to the Greeks."

 

[MWood]

Hello and thanks for your reply. What you wrote makes good sense.

I guess a related question I have is, "Why give the law, then?" If sin is dead and powerless apart from the law, then why give sin life and power via the law?

It seems to me that perhaps Paul is using hyperbole when he says that sin is dead apart from the law. Or else--for he says that those without the Mosaic Law have a law written on their hearts by which they will be judged--being "apart from the law" is purely theoretical and never happens in reality.

You say that the law amplifies or increases sin, and that makes sense to me. But it seems a bit different from what Paul says about sin being dead or nonexistent apart from the law. Again, perhaps this is just hyperbole?

An analogy would be good here. We'll use speed limit. If there was no speed limit law, then you could drive any speed that you wanted to and not be guilty. But when the speed limit law was enacted you are then guilty of the law. The same is true of the law and sin.

 

[RDKirk]

An analogy would be good here. We'll use speed limit. If there was no speed limit law, then you could drive any speed that you wanted to and not be guilty. But when the speed limit law was enacted you are then guilty of the law. The same is true of the law and sin.

I think Paul is saying something more with regard to the nature of the flesh. What you said is, I think, true, but more: The nature of the flesh is such that when the law is given, the natural impulse of the flesh is to disobey it.

So when there was no speed limit, I never wanted to drive faster than that anyway. But when I saw there was a speed limit, then the nature of my flesh was to desire to break it.

 

[giftofGod2]

A few things about some other things in Romans 7--

Romans 7:14-25 is speaking of the condition of people who are still under the law, which is still working as a tutor to lead them to Christ. Paul is using a literary tactic of setting himself forth as the example of something--whether he in all reality is that thing or not. He sets himself forth as the one who is "carnal, sold under sin" (verse 14) If you look at 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 you will find that Paul does not see this state of mind as desirable for a Christian, and I believe you will also see that not every Christian must be in this state of mind.

Romans 7:14-25 speaks of what Paul calls "the law of sin and death" it is an exact description of this law in the lives of those who are subject to it. But Paul states in Romans 8:2 that the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made us free from the law of sin and death, who are sanctified in Christ-- and therefore I would say that our goal, if we find ourselves living as Romans 7 Christians, ought to be to graduate to Romans 8 in our lifestyle.

Finally, if you compare the terms from Romans 7:5 and Romans 7:23, "in our members", I believe you will see that Romans 7:14-25 is speaking of those who are identified by Paul as being "in the flesh". And I will leave it up to any one of you to discover what it says in Romans 8:8-10 about those who are "in the flesh"--whether they are saved or not saved.

Therefore Romans 7 is speaking of those who have come to receive the light of Creation (Romans 1) and the light of conscience or the law (Romans 2) but have not yet fully received the light of Christ (Romans 3).

Finally, I heard a teaching on Romans 7 once, that in Romans 7:18 Paul's attitude is that he is seeking the how of what it takes to having victory over sin, but by the time he gets to verse 25 he has come to the end of himself and is no longer seeking a how but a who--Paul realizes that the key to victory is not in working up a sanctification in the power of his flesh but rather in simply developing his relationship with the Lord--as it is written, But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. 2 Corinthians 3:18.

 

[Soyeong]

There are two basic themes in Romans 7 that trip me up. The first concerns Romans 7:1-6. What does it mean to die to the law? To live in the Spirit and not to serve the law?

The second concerns Romans 7:7-20, but especially this passage:

But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. (Romans 7:8-12)​

How does sin lie dead apart from the law? Is it because of something like invincible ignorance? To me it seems like sin is evil and destructive by its very nature, and would wreak havoc with or without the law. And if sin is really dead apart from the law, then it would seem that the law is responsible for bringing death just as much as sin is, despite what Paul says in verse 13. How is it that "sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me."

Thanks in advance!

I do not think that it makes any sense to say that the Mosaic law is opposed to the Spirit or that when the Father gave the Mosaic law that He was acting against His Spirit. Everything listed in Galatians 5:16-23 as being works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Mosaic law, while everything listed as being fruits of the Spirit are also in accordance with the law, which should make sense because the law was given by God and the Spirit is God. So it again doesn't make any sense in Galatians 5:18 to say that we are not under the Mosaic law if we are led by the Spirit, especially when the Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27). Likewise, the Mosaic law is not the law that stirs up sin (Romans 7:5) or the law where sin had dominion over us (Romans 6:14), so I think clearly it is talking about a different law that we are not under.

Paul spoke about a number of different categories of laws, such as the law of God (Romans 3:31, Romans 7:22-25, Romans 8:7), the law of sin (Romans 7:23-25), the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), the law of the Spirit (Romans 8:2), the law of faith (Romans 3:27), the law of righteousness (Romans 9:31), the law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), and works of law (Galatians 3:10), and I think in order to make sense of Paul, we need to correctly identify which law he was talking about. Namey, it is the law of sin where sin had dominion over us (Romans 6:14), that stirs up sin (Romans 7:5), that stirs up the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21), that we die to (Romans 7:4), that held up captive (Romans 7:6), that sin lies dead apart from (Romans 7:8), that worked within Paul to cause him to not to do the good that he wanted to do (Romans 7:7-25), and that we have been set free from. Meanwhile, it is the Mosaic law that Paul said was holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), that was the good he sought to do (Romans 7:16), that he delighted in doing (Romans 7:22), and that he contrasted with the law of sin (Romans 7:22-25). Paul said that that we have been set free from our slavery to sin, which is our disobedience to God's law (Romans 7:7, 1 John 3:4), in order to be free to become obedient slaves of God leading to righteousness, and slaves of righteousness leading to sanctification (Romans 6:16-19).

 

[Soyeong]

With the law a person should realizes how far short they fall from being righteous. This
is the purpose of the law, to kill, to render someone open to the need of salvation. Hence,

In Deuteronomy 30:15-20, it is up front that the law brought life and a blessing for obedience and death and curse for disobedience. Jesus also said that if we want to enter into life, then obey the commandments (Matthew 19:17), so while one of the purposes of the law is to show us our need for a savior, the law also had the purpose to instruct us how to enter into life as a citizen of God's Kingdom. God encouraged His people to obey His instructions by saying that they were given for His people's own good (Deuteronomy 10:13, Deuteronomy 6:24). According to Titus 2:11-14, our salvation involves being trained by grace to do what God has instructed to be godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what God has instructed to be ungodly, sinful, and lawless.

 

[zippy2006]

I do not think that it makes any sense to say that the Mosaic law is opposed to the Spirit or that when the Father gave the Mosaic law that He was acting against His Spirit. Everything listed in Galatians 5:16-23 as being works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Mosaic law, while everything listed as being fruits of the Spirit are also in accordance with the law, which should make sense because the law was given by God and the Spirit is God. So it again doesn't make any sense in Galatians 5:18 to say that we are not under the Mosaic law if we are led by the Spirit, especially when the Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27). Likewise, the Mosaic law is not the law that stirs up sin (Romans 7:5) or the law where sin had dominion over us (Romans 6:14), so I think clearly it is talking about a different law that we are not under.

Paul spoke about a number of different categories of laws, such as the law of God (Romans 3:31, Romans 7:22-25, Romans 8:7), the law of sin (Romans 7:23-25), the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), the law of the Spirit (Romans 8:2), the law of faith (Romans 3:27), the law of righteousness (Romans 9:31), the law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), and works of law (Galatians 3:10), and I think in order to make sense of Paul, we need to correctly identify which law he was talking about. Namey, it is the law of sin where sin had dominion over us (Romans 6:14), that stirs up sin (Romans 7:5), that stirs up the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21), that we die to (Romans 7:4), that held up captive (Romans 7:6), that sin lies dead apart from (Romans 7:8), that worked within Paul to cause him to not to do the good that he wanted to do (Romans 7:7-25), and that we have been set free from. Meanwhile, it is the Mosaic law that Paul said was holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), that was the good he sought to do (Romans 7:16), that he delighted in doing (Romans 7:22), and that he contrasted with the law of sin (Romans 7:22-25). Paul said that that we have been set free from our slavery to sin, which is our disobedience to God's law (Romans 7:7, 1 John 3:4), in order to be free to become obedient slaves of God leading to righteousness, and slaves of righteousness leading to sanctification (Romans 6:16-19).

Thank you for your perspective and the many references to scripture. I think asking what law Paul was referring to is a good question and I think you raise an important topic which applies both to Jewish converts and to Jewish-Christian relations. Indeed, you got to the heart of the issue of my OP. That said, I think there are a few reasons to disagree with your assessment:

Consider Romans 7:7

What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin. I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”​

...and Romans 7:12-13

So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.
​

I think these verses give evidence that when Paul says we are not "under the law" he is talking primarily about the Mosaic Law--he is identifying the Mosaic Law with the letter of the law as opposed to the spirit of the law. This is particularly apparent in Romans 7:7-11 where the meaning of "law" is clearly derived from verse 7 and the even clearer word "commandment" is often used instead. Another clear reference is Romans 7:6 where Paul says that we no longer serve under the "old written code." What else could that mean but the Mosaic Law?

​

For example, consider your reference to Romans 7:8 at the end of this quote:

​

...and I think in order to make sense of Paul, we need to correctly identify which law he was talking about. Namey, it is the law of sin where sin had dominion over us (Romans 6:14), that stirs up sin (Romans 7:5), that stirs up the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21), that we die to (Romans 7:4), that held up captive (Romans 7:6), that sin lies dead apart from (Romans 7:8)...

Clearly Romans 7:8 is not referring to the law of sin and death, for in the preceding verse Paul explicitly denies that "the law is sin," and thus refers to the Mosaic Law rather than the law of sin and death.

 

[giftofGod2]

Hebrews 7:12 speaks of the fact that in the New Testament there is a "change also of the law".

I do not believe that God is here abrogating the Old Testament law. I believe that the change being spoken of is that it is moved from being on tablets of stone to being on tablets of human hearts (2 Corinthians 3:3).

In the Old Covenant, the law was given on tablets of stone. But in the New Covenant, God writes it in our minds and on our hearts (Hebrews 8:10, Hebrews 10:16).

He can do this even for the Gentile who knows nothing of the law. In Galatians 5:16-24, Paul shows how by walking according to the Spirit the law will be fulfilled in us. We do not have to look at the requirement in order for this to be. It is a matter of a relationship with Christ, of having Him dwell on the inside of you and live His life through you (see Galatians 2:20).

Nevertheless in Proverbs it also says that if we turn our ears away from hearing the law, even our prayer shall be an abomination.

But I would say that the key to being able to obey the requirement is not in our attempts at obedience in the power of the flesh, but rather it comes from being in the presence of Christ and thus being conformed to His image in morality and character. 2 Corinthians 3:18.

 

[Soyeong]

Thank you for your perspective and the many references to scripture. I think asking what law Paul was referring to is a good question and I think you raise an important topic which applies both to Jewish converts and to Jewish-Christian relations. Indeed, you got to the heart of the issue of my OP. That said, I think there are a few reasons to disagree with your assessment:

Consider Romans 7:7

What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin. I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”​

...and Romans 7:12-13

So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.
​

I think these verses give evidence that when Paul says we are not "under the law" he is talking primarily about the Mosaic Law--he is identifying the Mosaic Law with the letter of the law as opposed to the spirit of the law. This is particularly apparent in Romans 7:7-11 where the meaning of "law" is clearly derived from verse 7 and the even clearer word "commandment" is often used instead. Another clear reference is Romans 7:6 where Paul says that we no longer serve under the "old written code." What else could that mean but the Mosaic Law?

​

For example, consider your reference to Romans 7:8 at the end of this quote:

​

Clearly Romans 7:8 is not referring to the law of sin and death, for in the preceding verse Paul explicitly denies that "the law is sin," and thus refers to the Mosaic Law rather than the law of sin and death.

Titus 2:11-14 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

According to these verses, our salvation involves being saved from the penalty of our sins/lawlessness (1 John 3:4) by Christ giving himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, but our salvation also includes being saved from continuing to be lawless by God's grace training us to do what He has revealed to be godly, righteous, and good, and training us to renounce doing what He has revealed to be ungodly, sinful, and lawless. I think the description of what God's grace trains us to do very accurately fits the description of what God's law instructs us to do by instructing us to do what God has revealed to be holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) and to refrain from doing what God has revealed to be sin (Roman 7:7). Furthermore, Romans 1:5 says that we have received grace to bring about the obedience of faith.

Romans 6:14-15 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!

So I again do not think it makes any sense to say these verses are contrasting God's grace with God's law as though a house divided against itself could stand, especially when it is God's grace that trains us to obey God's law through faith. In addition, it doesn't make any sense for Paul to say that we aren't under the Mosaic law, but that by no means are we disobey it by doing what it reveals to be sin. Rather, it is the law of sin that fits the description of sin having dominion over us and of working against what God's grace trains us to do (Titus 2:11-14). Note that Titus 2:14 doesn't say that we have been redeemed from the law, but from all lawlessness. It doesn't make any sense to hold the position that the law was only intended for Jews and that Christ came to free Gentiles from the law because Christ would not have needed to come to free Gentiles from a law that they were never under in the first place. If you say that Christ gave himself to free us from sin and to free us from the Mosaic law or if you say that the Mosaic law stirs up sin or holds us captive, then you are equating the Mosaic law with sin, but I think Paul wrote Romans 7:7 precisely so that we wouldn't make that error. In Romans 3:31, Paul was saying that our faith does not abolish the law, but rather our faith upholds it, so do you think that Paul was saying our faith upholds a law that stirs up sin and where sin had dominion over us? According to 2 Peter 3:15-17, Paul is difficult to understand, but those who are ignorant and unstable twist his words and fall into the error of lawlessness.

I am in agreement that Romans 7:12-13 is about the Mosaic law and saying that it is holy, righteous, and good, but that sin works through what is good. So the law is not sin, but rather it reveals to us what sin is, however in verse 7:8, the law of sin can stir up sin by working through this revelation. With the law of God, but without the law of sin, we would have knowledge of what is holy, righteous, and good and of what is sin, and be able to make the simple decision live accordingly, so without the law of sin, sin would be dead. But God's law could not cause us to live according to it because it was weakened by the flesh, so God made a New Covenant where He would take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and send His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and send His Son to free us from lawlessness so that we would be free to obey it and meet is righteous requirement, we who walk according to the Spirit and not according to the flesh (Romans 8:2-4). God's law is spiritual (Romans 7:14), it is those whose mind is set on the flesh who refuse to submit to God's law (Romans 8:7), it is that works of the flesh that are against the Spirit and the Mosaic law, and it is the fruits of the Spirit that are in accordance with the Mosaic law (Galatians 5:19-23).

Another clear reference is Romans 7:6 where Paul says that we no longer serve under the "old written code." What else could that mean but the Mosaic Law?

The difference between following the letter of the law and follow the spirit of the law is not in whether or not you follow the law, but in the manner in which you follow the law. It is about whether you follow the law exactly how it is written without regard to its intent or whether you follow the law with regard to its intent. The intent or goal of the law is to form a relationship with Christ for righteousness for all who believe (Romans 10:4). Prior to Paul's relationship with Christ, he had been keeping the law meticulously according to the letter while missing the whole point of it, so he considered it to be rubbish (Philippians 3:8). If you see the law as a set of rules that you have to obey legalistically in order to earn favor with God, then you have missed the whole point because obedience to the law is about growing in a relationship with Christ through demonstrating our love (John 14:15) and through demonstrating our faith in God about how we should live and that His commands are for our own good (Deuteronomy 6:24, Deuteronomy 10:13), for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4). The problem in Romans 9:30-32 was not that Israel failed to obtain righteousness because they followed God's instructions and He gave them faulty instructions, but rather the problem was the manner in which they pursued the law legalistically as though righteousness were by works rather than of pursuing the law spiritually as though righteousness were by faith. In Paul's eyes, someone who obeyed God's law legalistically was in the same boat as the pagans (Galatians 4:1-11) because neither were living by faith, but now we have way of obeying the law by faith according to the Spirit as it was intended.

 

[giftofGod2]

In Romans 9:30-33 and Romans 10:1-4, the Jews missed it because they pursued the law period rather than God Himself. Making an idol out of His law. Whether they had pursued the law legalistically or spiritually, they missed it because they were pursuing the law of righteousness and not as it were by faith. The Gentiles got it when they did not pursue the law of righteousness.

The law is not of faith (Galatians 3:10-13).

 

[Soyeong]

In Romans 9:30-33 and Romans 10:1-4, the Jews missed it because they pursued the law period rather than God Himself. Making an idol out of His law. Whether they had pursued the law legalistically or spiritually, they missed it because they were pursuing the law of righteousness and not as it were by faith. The Gentiles got it when they did not pursue the law of righteousness.

The law is not of faith (Galatians 3:10-13).

In order to understand Galatians 3:10-13, we again need to correctly determine which law is not of faith. Israel was to obey the Mosaic law out of faith in God to preserve them, out of faith in God to bless them, out of faith in God to give them the land that He sword to their fathers, out of faith that His commands were for their own good, out of faith in God to lead them in how they should live, and out of faith in the promise of a redeemer (Deuteronomy 6:20-25), so the law of Moses is a law of faith, and it is the way that the righteous lived by faith (Habakkuk 2:4). Living by faith does not refer to living in some other manner that is not in obedience to God's commands.

In regard to Galatians 3:10-13, the fact that works of law are contrasted with the Book of the Law should be a pretty clear indication that they are not speaking about the same thing. The Book of the Law speaks about the faith of Abraham, which is of very important throughout the Bible, as he is the father of our faith (Romans 4:16). Those who rely on works of the law are under a curse because they are not living by the faith of Abraham and thus are failing to do everything written in the Book of the Law. Obedience to the Book of the Law never meant to be relied upon for our justification before God, for the righteous shall live by faith. According to Deuteronomy 30:15-20, the law brings life and a blessing for obedience and death and a curse for disobedience, so now that Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, all that remains is life and a blessing through obedience to the law by faith.

There is no definitive article in the Greek for the phrase "works of law", so it can refer to works of any law, but Paul used it to refer to Jewish traditions, customs, rulings, and fences for how they taught to obey God's law. Some Jewish groups wanted people to obey their customs in order to become justified, such as in Acts 15:1, or with the Qumran text 4QMMT, so Paul was arguing against those who relied on obedience to their customs in order to become justified and was referring to these works of law as not being of faith.

In Romans 9:30-Romans 10:4, I agree that Israel missed it because they were not pursuing a relationship with God based on faith and love, but I disagree that pursuing such a relationship does not involve pursuing obedience to God. If we have faith in God about how we should live, then we will demonstrate that faith pursuing obedience to His commands, and if we love God, then we will demonstrate that love by pursuing obedience to His commands (John 14:15). However, God's commands can be pursued for reasons other than faith and love, and God has always disdained it when His people outwardly honored God with their lips while their hearts were far from Him (Isaiah 29:13, Mark 7:6-8). The Gentiles obtained righteousness because they were pursuing God's law out of faith, and it is by observing someone's obedience to God's law that we can recognize that they have a circumcised heart (Romans 2:26, Deuteronomy 30:6).

 

[giftofGod2]

In Romans 9:30 it says that the Gentiles did not even pursue righteousness, so how could they have been pursuing the law of righteousness?

Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, did not attain to it. Why? Because they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, did not submit to the righteousness of God. See also Philippians 3:9.

Galatians 3:12 specifically says, And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Clearly this is not talking about anything but the law of Moses as was given in the book of the law, as can be seen by the context (Galatians 3:10). In what way is the book of the law contrasted to the law in Galatians 3:12? it is not contrasted, but it is clear to me that Galatians 3:12 is speaking of the book of the law just as much as Galatians 3:10 is.

When we speak of "the law of faith" we are speaking of a law as being a principle, the law of faith is the principle of faith, that teaching which encompasses what we know about a walk of faith and also the inward faith that we have in Jesus.

As believers we need to get our priorities straight. It ought to be relationship first and obedience second. Consider the book of Ephesians. The first three chapters of that book is about our identity in Christ and our relationship to Christ. Not until the last half do we arrive at things of obedience. I recommend the book Sit, Walk, Stand by Watchman Nee. I have not personally read it, but I hear that it teaches well on this principle of relationship first. The very title of the book speaks to me well about this. We are seated in the heavenlies first and our walk and our stand in Christ are based in this.

I am however in agreement with you, @Soyeong , that obedience to the law is taught in the New Testament. But I really believe that we need to have a strong handle of the grace of God before we attempt to obey, because otherwise it can be very easy to put the cart before the horse and think that we are somehow earning our favour with God because of our obedience. When our favour before God is given because of the Cross first and foremost and our obedience ought to flow out of the fact that we stand in God's favour.

And yes, most certainly many come to favour through repentance which leads to obedience and we stand in favour because we continue in our walk of faith. And faith most certainly results in the law being fulfilled in us, but because we walk according to the Spirit and not because we are focused on the requirement and attempting to obey it.

If a man puts his faith, hope, and trust in Christ I believe everything else will fall into place. As we take up our cross and follow Him we will do unto others as we would have them do unto us, which is the Golden Rule found in Matthew 7:12, and Jesus said that this is the law and the prophets.

 

[Soyeong]

NT

 

[Soyeong]

In Romans 9:30 it says that the Gentiles did not even pursue righteousness, so how could they have been pursuing the law of righteousness?

Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, did not attain to it. Why? Because they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, did not submit to the righteousness of God. See also Philippians 3:9.

If Israel did not obtain righteousness because they pursued the law as if righteousness were based on works rather than pursuing it by faith, then that implies that they would have obtained righteousness if they had pursued the law by faith, and that this is the manner that the Gentiles had obtained righteousness. Righteousness has never come from our obedience to the law, but from having a faith in God the leads us to obey it, for the righteous shall live by faith. The law is not about how to obtain righteousness, but about how to act by faith as someone God has made righteous by faith. Prior to becoming a Christian, Paul had been meticulously keeping the law, but not out of faith, so he had completely missed that the whole point of keeping the law was growing in a relationship with Christ by faith.

Galatians 3:12 specifically says, And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Clearly this is not talking about anything but the law of Moses as was given in the book of the law, as can be seen by the context (Galatians 3:10). In what way is the book of the law contrasted to the law in Galatians 3:12? it is not contrasted, but it is clear to me that Galatians 3:12 is speaking of the book of the law just as much as Galatians 3:10 is.

In Hebrews 11, it is full of examples of people who obeyed God's instructions by faith, so obedience to any of God's instructions, such as those contained in the Book of the Law, is evidently about demonstrating our faith in God about how we should live, which means that either Paul was wrong about it not being of faith, or your interpretation of him is wrong. In Galatians 3:10, Paul was speaking against those who relied on works of law in order to become justified, which is a major theme of Galatians, not against the Book of the Law. In Galatians 3:11, it says that it is evident that no one has been justified before God by the law, for the righteous shall live by faith, so the Book of the Law is not about how to become justified, but about how to live by faith. So Galatians 3:12 is speaking against works of law as not being of faith in contrast with the Book of the Law, which again, is evidently true because by relying on works of law for righteousness they were not having faith in God for righteousness.

As believers we need to get our priorities straight. It ought to be relationship first and obedience second. Consider the book of Ephesians. The first three chapters of that book is about our identity in Christ and our relationship to Christ. Not until the last half do we arrive at things of obedience. I recommend the book Sit, Walk, Stand by Watchman Nee. I have not personally read it, but I hear that it teaches well on this principle of relationship first. The very title of the book speaks to me well about this. We are seated in the heavenlies first and our walk and our stand in Christ are based in this.

We are saved by grace through faith, not by doing good works, but for the purpose of doing good works by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-10). If we have faith in God and if we love God, then we will follow His commands for how to do good works. Our relationship with God is built on faith and love, so obedience to God is the way to build a relationship with Him. I would agree that the relationship precedes the obedience, but I don't think that one has a priority over the other because they go hand in hand. When we confess Jesus as as Lord, we are stating that we are in a relationship with him as well as the nature of our relationship, which implies coming under his authority and submitting to his commands.

I am however in agreement with you, @Soyeong , that obedience to the law is taught in the New Testament. But I really believe that we need to have a strong handle of the grace of God before we attempt to obey, because otherwise it can be very easy to put the cart before the horse and think that we are somehow earning our favour with God because of our obedience. When our favour before God is given because of the Cross first and foremost and our obedience ought to flow out of the fact that we stand in God's favour.

We have received grace to bring about the obedience of faith (Romans 1:5) and grace is what trains us to be obedient to God through faith (Titus 2:11-14), so again I think grace comes before obedience, but they go hand in hand.

And yes, most certainly many come to favour through repentance which leads to obedience and we stand in favour because we continue in our walk of faith. And faith most certainly results in the law being fulfilled in us, but because we walk according to the Spirit and not because we are focused on the requirement and attempting to obey it.

Why is it that you are willing to say that faith results in the law being fulfilled in us, but you don't want to say that the law is of faith?

 

[giftofGod2]

I suppose I have to quote Galatians 3:10 to prove you wrong, my friend.

For as many as are the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.

Galatians 3:10 and Galatians 3:12, are clearly identifying the law as that which is written in the book of the law.

And in Galatians 3:12, And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

Through the law is the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).

Paul is saying that if you are going to base your walk on law-keeping, then your life in Christ is based on living in the commandments. But if you live by faith, your life in Christ is based on your faith in Christ. The first is not a valid way to see faith. If our salvation is based on our performance, then it is very sketchy indeed (and I reallize that you are not saying that our salvation is based in our performance; rather I am pointing out what I believe the passage means).

Now concerning your first statements of your last post, In Romans 9:30-33, Romans 10:1-4 the Israelites goofed in that they were seeking to be righteous in the law period, not because they were not seeking the law by faith. If they had been seeking the law by faith, they would have still goofed. The point is that they should have been seeking God Himself, but instead they were attempting to make themselves worthy of God through their own obedience to the law, when what God required of them was faith in Him.

I recall in Exodus where the Israellites boasted that they would do everything that God commanded, and God gave them the ten commandments, and before they even received them, they had committed idolatry with the Golden Calf. Their record of obedience did not go uphill from there in Israel's history.

God requires faith, let us consider the order of how God wants things. A man comes to faith in Christ, receives the Spirit, and bears the fruit of the Spirit, whicih fulfills the law and against which there is no law. A man cannot receive Christ by cleaning up his act and making himself righteous before God by cleaning up his act. God catches the fish first and then He cleans them.

Now in attempting to establish his own righteousness (see Romans 10:3) a man may more readily come to the realization that his own righteousness will never be enough, which is why the law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. It shows a man that he is a sinner and that his only salvation can be through trusting in Christ to save him. He can in no way earn his salvation through what he does or doesn't do, but when he finally becomes saved, it will affect what he does or doesn't do. The blood of Jesus will have cleansed him from all sin, so his behaviour will not be according to the former sin patterns of his life.

When he looks into the perfect law of liberty, the saved man will not have the Romans 7 principles abiding in his behaviour, but it will be his delight to obey the law of the Lord and he will continually walk in victory with a certain kind of joy.

Romans 9:30-10:4, What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, whiich followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; As it is written, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever beieveth on him shall not be ashamed. Ch.10 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.