What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Submitted by theshovelHey Jim, I was reading a Romans passage. Do we serve the LAW [ie ten commandments] of God from the inner man somehow? Are we talking about the same “law” or is there a different law being stated here. Its always thought he’s referring the mosaic law because of the massive amount of reference he did to it prior to these statements in the book of Romans…but is it? Adam
For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Romans 7:22-25
Hi Adam!
There is a long-time misunderstanding regarding the distinctions Paul referred to between the Law written on stone and the Law written in the heart. I find it absolutely amazing how much gnat-straining and camel-swallowing goes on as people try to figure out which parts still apply and which don’t. I just read an explanation from one of the experts on the Christian Living portion of a web site as to which laws we’re still under as Christians…and it made me cringe! This horse crap is so prevalent that no wonder so many people are so confused about the simple distinctions between life and death in relation to the Biblical verses. It is blindness indeed that keeps preachers and teachers spewing their legal garbage, for in their attempt to explain the Scriptures they have to ignore the prime distinction between the external law and the inner reality.
The Law of Moses was a set of standards for Israel (based off the reality of God) that was able to be recorded on stone plates in an attempt to govern from the outside. Why from the outside? Because there was no governance from the inside. The truth of the matter is that throughout their long history Israel recognized the total failure of an external governance to compensate for the inability to govern oneself…but they dare not let this inability be known because it would blow their cover!
Littered throughout the history of Israel were many prophecies, rituals and miraculous interventions that spoke of, hinted at and/or demanded an inward reality of self-governance. This distinction of self-governing was glaringly foretold in, among other places and by other prophets, by Jeremiah who made the distinction between the inability of Israel’s keeping of an outward set of standards leading to the coming miraculous intervention by which God would put his spirit into the heart making it so that the law was kept.
Of course, Israel was still blinded to this reality of what Jeremiah spoke even though they could read, discuss and ARGUE the writings of the prophets. It took the very life of God being put into a man to make it known…and known it became when the Spirit came into those men waiting in that upper room in Jerusalem at Pentecost. Even after that time the sheer distinction between the ministry of death (law written in stone) and the ministry of life (law written in the heart) could easily become confused when Jews would argue it after the fashion of their forefathers. It took one who was born through the line of Israel but displaced through rejection of his own people and sent among those considered outsiders to really make the distinction we knew in our hearts so clear. Yep, that would be Paul.
All through Paul’s writings, which expressed the insight given him to share with those not of Israel, he made the simple distinction between life and death. The technicalities of external commands had been his specialty, but in being sent to share the life of Christ to those who were raised outside the framework of the Jew’s heritage he was forced to recognize that the same Spirit that had been given to the Jews was also given to the non-Jews in equal measure.
In other words, in being removed from his zone of understanding he had been prepared by God to understand that the stuff upon which a true keeping of the law was made was NOT from an observance of any of the technicalities of that standard, but was the very life of God…the same life of God that temporarily drop in from time to time upon people in times past in Israel’s history.
Remember when Jesus was asked which was the greatest command in the Law? He quoted no technicality but only the under-riding reality of LOVE (Love God, love your neighbor). You see, all those meticulous commands were only shadows of a life lived that did not harm one’s fellow man. The added commands had been formed around their community and had been established for specific reasons as the need arose, to either protect some from a real harm, to provide for those left out, to judge against those who intentionally or unintentionally injured others, etc, etc.
But it all came back to a life that is not built upon falsehood, deceit, greed and hatred, etc, but upon honesty, truth and caring, etc. This is a concept that is professed even by those who do the opposite. Nobody wants to be cheated or hurt or lied to, but will cheat, hurt or lie to those that are being judged as cheaters, murderers and liars. The very stuff of the law had to do with a true goodness that could only be broken down into categories and specifics, but the very reality of a life that embodied a goodness that didn’t need a rule to make it happen was perpetually witnessed to. This is the very sense behind having the law written upon the heart…and it would have been recognized as being testified to by that written in stone of the Law.
The very fact that Paul would play the word for law against itself only made it obvious that he was describing the very difference between an external shell that did nothing and the inner reality of a life made alive by God himself. Remember, if anybody could rattle the legalist for preaching law and shake up the religious community around him, it was Paul. So, in contrasting law with law he was only making his point stronger by contrasting the lie held by religious, self-righteous man with the promised miracle of life of God that causes a person not to need the external command that could never do anything but condemn in the first place.
The clear distinction found in Paul’s CONTRASTING use (always notice this) is the difference between what he called the ministry of death and the ministry of life. No, he was not suggesting that we now had to figure out WHICH of the 10 commandments might still apply, but that the love of God that made for a true life had now been put within us so that the need for an outward governance only denied the very life of God. This reflects Paul’s statement to Timothy as to how those who want to be teachers of the law simply don’t know what they’re talking about!
This means that even in quoting any one of the commands it could be shown that Christ did what the Law could not do, for the commands themselves only judged and condemned those under it. I mean, who is going to deny that evil intentions reflect something other than life or that the true goodness behind the written Law’s commands is something to be despised?
I am glad that enforced, written laws have protected me and my family from harm by those who may intend otherwise…but I am under no illusion that the absence of specific matters of injury is only a band-aid against the intentions of the walking dead. I am instead convinced that the miraculous work of God’s Spirit without the need for external rules is as far superior to an externally controlled behavior as life is to death!
Anyhow, I hope this gives some sort of answer to your question! :)
Hi Jim, I wanted to know what this meant [where you wrote]: This means that even in quoting any one of the commands it could be shown that Christ did what the Law could not do, for the commands themselves only judged and condemned those under it. I mean, who is going to deny that evil intentions reflect something other than life or that the true goodness behind the written Law’s commands is something to be despised? Adam
Many are often confused or troubled by the inclusion of Biblical laws contained in the letters and accounts of the apostles, especially since they have been tagged by the religious mentality as being a re-affirmation that those in Christ are still under the particular laws mentioned. I will admit that I also found this constant quoting of OT laws quite intimidating as I began to realize our freedom from the law.
The simple fact is that the real culprit behind a legalistic mentality is not the law itself, but instead is the constant obsession that we need it as an outward set of standards to follow, knowing full well that those who had been under it could not. Remember, Paul is the one who stated that the Law is holy and righteous and good, but that the problem was in the weakness of the flesh.
Because love himself has been put within us we now not only recognize the imperative need or demand for love in any true relationship our very being rejoices in its reality. To have it included in a letter from Paul or Peter, etc would not have hit those who heard it as being the standard by which we must now operate, but would have been a witness to the reality of its embedding within them through God’s Spirit.
Instead of making the usual assumption that a quoting of specific laws in the NT letters are somehow legalistic in nature so that they either have to be danced around or else written off as a product of the apostles’ legalistic tendencies we should rather expect that they would have been constantly including them here and there as a testimony to the far superior reality of a life lived without their former futile demands. In other words, the hearts of the believers would be reassured that though they were never able to keep such standards that the true life demanded by the former inability was more than met in Christ. Instead of us reading the NT writings in defensiveness every time we come to an OT quote we can rest in the overwhelming relief that Christ has more than fulfilled the former false sense of law-keeping, knowing that Christ in our hearts has actuality brought the goods into us so that the former concepts of good vs. evil have been replaced by a real life that needs no such rules to make love happen…especially since such commands never did.
Does this help at all?
Jim
Comments
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Instead of us reading the NT writings in defensiveness every time we come to an OT quote we can rest in the overwhelming relief that Christ has more than fulfilled the former false sense of “law-keeping”, knowing that Christ in our hearts has actuality brought the goods into us so that the former concepts of good vs. evil have been replaced by a real life that needs no such rules to make love happen — especially since such commands never did. Does this help at all?
Jim
Oh, you BET it is helpful!
Love, Adam
PS: OK, so I am about 10 years late on my response! lol
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
So it may have been a little delayed ... I am still glad to hear back from you! :)
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Hello Bill,
My friend, you may be so tightly tied to the Moral Law that you don't even realize your reasonings and conclusions nullify the distinctions between the old and new covenants. I mean, you do use the phrase "Spirit-produced" in connection with sanctification, but then throw everything back upon the same concept of obedience as found in the Law, only updated as God-given commands in the NT. No, obedience is not the problem, for we have been brought into the obedience of Christ. And in Romans 6:17-18, Paul speaks of this obedience in such a way as to highlight the distinction I refer to:
I have a lot more written concerning obedience. You can find that here: Obedience articles
Regarding Romans 2:14-15, I suggest it needs to be examined in view of its strategic placement in Paul's message. The fact is that he inserted driving his real point home to those Jews who thought they had something to stand upon in the Law. In referring to "Gentiles" " not THE Gentiles " can it be assumed that Paul indicated all men in general? Or is it possible that he was describing Gentiles in whom the Spirit of God was at work, that is, the very same ones who were looked down upon by those Jews Paul was dealing with in this part of the letter? Whatever it is, the conscience bears witness, for it is not the same thing as the work of the Law written in the heart. Didn't Jesus confront the self-righteous Jews in the same way when he told them that a Gentile had more faith than he had seen in all of Israel?
Love has been put within us in Christ, for it has been shed abroad in our hearts through the Spirit. This love in us is the fulfilling of the Law.
My friend, what you pass off as Christian legalism is the very distortion of the good news that Paul wrote about. Think not? Consider how Peter himself had been called out by Paul as guilty of this very thing simply because he withdrew because of intimidation from fellowship with the uncircumcised believers. Paul's treatise to the Galatians didn't revolve around eternal destiny, as it so often assumed, rather it had everything to do with how they lived with one another.
I'm sure you already have you mind made up, but I offer these things up for your consideration.
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
You agree with me on a couple of points, you say? We're really getting somewhere now! LOL. :)
Yes, but to what extent did Paul take this? While I don't question that Peter was born of God, he was the one Paul used as a prime example of having been guilty of corrupting the truth of the good news of Christ. Remember, it was Paul who said that "Peter stood condemned", and that's why he opposed him to his face. Now, if Paul was not saying that Peter was in danger of losing his salvation " which I am not suggesting in the least " then in what possible sense did Paul bring this situation up in such direct connection to what he stated from the beginning of the letter?
Yes, we are talking about a believer here, a man who Paul said was not straightforward about the truth of the gospel. The thing was, Paul didn't confront Peter regarding any specific doctrinal error in how he preached the gospel. At least, Paul didn't suggest anything of the sort in the letter he wrote. Nevertheless, Peter's intimidation put him in the spot where his message came across loud and clear. And what was the message Peter demanded of the uncircumcised Galatian believers when he stopped eating with them? His message suggested that these uncircumcised saints of God still needed to become like the Jews. His unspoken message was one of justification by works.
You may argue the connection, but Paul went right from there and launched into one of the most profound declarations of justification through faith in Christ, apart from observing the law " all in connection with how a believer gave into the pressure to conform with those who demanded that Gentiles needed to obey the Scriptures in just this one area regarding circumcision. This portion of Galatians is mostly considered as having been written regarding how to preach the gospel clearly to the unbeliever, but the truth of the matter is that Paul wrote it to believers who were falling back into law for their justification in how they were living their lives as believers.
When I slowly saw the connectedness of this whole matter, I began to really see Paul's simple message of Christ. Yes, Christ and him crucified, and how it all tied together " without my having to keep it so technically segregated. I used to feel obligated to explain when I was referring to "salvation" as opposed to "service" because I wanted to make sure I wasn't going to confuse those who listened to me. I was trained to take great care in not confusing believers when talking about serving the Lord because I knew it could easily be thought that I was adding some kind of conditions to salvation. It actually irked me that Paul and the other apostles didn't seem as concerned as I was to make the clear distinction between salvation and service.
Well apparently, you don't totally agree with me regarding the Romans 2 passage. LOL!! I'm going to let you think it over a bit more, but let me add this: Could Paul have been referring not to all Gentiles, but only to certain ones among them? Are there not any Gentiles that come to mind that would have been perfect examples to make Paul's real point? Could these be the same uncircumcised people who kept the requirements of the Law as mentioned in Romans 2:26? Could these be those who are Jews inwardly? Just remember the point Paul was building toward.
Antinomianism, you ask? You can look that one up on the site as well. :)
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
My friend Bill, where you concede to the occasional need to talk about the gospel to Christians, I see the gospel as the everything to those who believe, to those who are born of God. For the gospel declares Christ, and him crucified. He who is the new creation, and we in him.
I understand your viewpoint, for it reminds me of my Bible college years where I learned how to slice and dice my way through the Bible in the attempt to make the gospel clear. You know what I'm talking about, as it's what most Bible students and teachers assume they do but others don't: "Rightly dividing the word of truth". But with all our rightly dividing, to which mind, which reasoning, are we actually relating? What I came to realize is that we were trying to make it understandable to those who didn't believe but might be persuaded ... if it could be shown to make sense. But the gospel will never make sense to those who insist they have to understand it first.
For the gospel is the power of God to those who believe. It's not that the gospel doesn't make sense, but it only makes sense to those who see it through the eyes of faith. In his letter, Paul told the Roman believers that he was ready to declare the gospel to them, And so he did " but not as an evangelical training class. For in his declaration of the gospel, he not only dealt with our introduction into this grace by which we stand, but he also intertwined the reality of Christ's death and resurrection into everything connected with them as the new creation in Christ. All of it is our salvation, for we were delivered out of the power of death and into the power of a new life.
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: impossible with men...
Excellent insight here, my friend. Fortunately, what is impossible with man is possible with God.
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: God granting the faith
God is the one who gives faith, who causes repentance, the one who creates the new mind, the one who initiates, the one who makes alive. In other words, it's all of God, even when we "participate" in it. God can bring this salvation about when we are either prepared or when we are opposed, with the Bible being quoted or without a word from it. Nothing is impossible with God. :)
Jim
Re: God granting the faith
Re: God granting the faith
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What IS the Gospel
This is incredibly powerful, Adam. The gospel may be presented by the words we speak, even those wonderful quotes from the Bible, but as you say, the gospel is the very work of God through Jesus Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection. For what is the very WORD that has been sent by God to do his will other than Christ himself?
Well, I'm late for work
Jim
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Re: What Law was Paul talking about in Romans 7?
Rm. 7 "the law"
It is not possible to interpret Romans correctly unless it is clearly understood which law Paul is referencing. Rm. 2:13 is not referencing the Sinai code. Rm. 5:20 is not referencing the Sinai code. Rm. 3:20 is referencing the Sinai code, but 3:21 is not, however 3:21 is also a translation error. "apart from law" "from" is a the wrong preposition. The phrase 'apart from law' is actually 'apart of law' or 'a part of the law'. "But now a righteousness from God, apart of law, has been made known to which the Law [Sinai code] and the Prophets testify." It is true that no person will be declared righteous by God for observing the Sinai code, but the law was modified after Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection and ascension, Heb. 7:12, and it is the change Paul is defending in Romans. "For it is not those who hear the law (the change) who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those obey the law (the change) who will be declared righteous." Rom. 2:13
Straining gnats and swallowing camels!
Greetings Theodore A. Jones,
At one time, a presentation like this would have pulled me in with its persuasiveness and its illusion of Biblically-sound, intellectually-superior wisdom, and I would have felt compelled to address it with the same sense of seriousness in which it was received. Any more, all I hear are the manipulations of a myopic scientist who disregards the life of his “subject” as he dismembers it and examines samples of it under his microscope. The mystery of Christ is not some kind of secret code or complex doctrinal puzzle that must be figured out by those of intellectual means, rather it is God’s wisdom in Christ that has been made known to all who have freely received him by grace through faith.
Jim
awesome Jim - God has
awesome Jim - God has delivered us from ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL codes and precepts related to the world system. the only “code” we “follow” is the “law” of LIFE.
yes.
yes.
WOW!
what a discussion! and ADAM! wow! awesome and great stuff of LIFE attested to … the very LIFE of GOD WHO IS the very SOURCE of the New Creation! i love, adore and appreciate so very much how that miraculous Life of Christ in us is so loved, adored, cherished, supported, testified to and about here at theshovel.net!! :) i so love how the good news - the 'gospel' is a PERSON! the Person of Jesus Christ! the good news is about Him, and even better, it is about Him and us together, and … well … He Himself will always be our good news for now and ever more! thank you so much mr. shovel-dude-man for all your time and labor of love in sharing and testifying of Christ Who Is our Life!
Add new comment