do this and live

The Law, that is, the Sinai Covenant,  in the words of the NT, is ‘not of faith’ (Gals 3:11).  God’s covenant with Abraham relied on God’s promise for its fulfilment received simply by faith (Gals 3:17-19, 22).  Law, by contrast, depends on human ‘works’.  It is a covenant of works and so Paul  speaks regularly of ‘the works of the law’ (Gals 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10; Roms 3:20).  Law and promise are not merely two different covenants they are covenants based on two different principles (Gals 3:18).  Promise rests entirely on righteousness  and life gifted from God while Law depends on righteousness and life gained by man.  Promise requires only faith in the Promise-Maker; Law demands faith in self.    And so Paul juxtaposes ‘the works of the Law and the hearing of faith’ (Gals 3:2)

Despite the NT consistently and clearly presenting the Sinai Covenant as a works covenant many doubt that it is.  It is hard to understand why.  The evidence seems overwhelming.  For instance at the inception of the covenant we read,

Exod 19:1-8 (ESV)
On the third new moon after the people of Israel had gone out of the land of Egypt, on that day they came into the wilderness of Sinai. They set out from Rephidim and came into the wilderness of Sinai, and they encamped in the wilderness. There Israel encamped before the mountain, while Moses went up to God. The Lord called to him out of the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.”  So Moses came and called the elders of the people and set before them all these words that the Lord had commanded him. All the people answered together and said, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do.” And Moses reported the words of the people to the Lord.

The Lord makes clear that the covenant with all its promised blessing (you shall be my treasured possession…) depends on their obedience and faithfulness to the covenant laws.  Israel understood this, for the people rather too self-confidently affirm, ‘All that the Lord has spoken we will do’.  The covenant depended on works; it was a covenant of ‘he who does shall live’.  That is precisely the point made in Lev 18.

Lev 18:1-5 (ESV)
And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, I am the Lord your God. You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you. You shall not walk in their statutes. You shall follow my rules and keep my statutes and walk in them. I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore keep my statutes and my rules; if a person does them, he shall live by them: I am the Lord.

The covenant did not assume obedience as the consequence or effect of life rather it promised it as the cause or means of life.  This law-works perspective of the covenant is repeated regularly through the OT.  When Moses repeats the covenant to the generation of Israel about to enter the Land we read,

Deut 4:1 (ESV)
“And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the rules that I am teaching you, and do them, that you may live, and go in and take possession of the land that the Lord, the God of your fathers, is giving you.

and again,

Deut 8:1 (ESV)
“The whole commandment that I command you today you shall be careful to do, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land that the Lord swore to give to your fathers.

Life, and life in the Promised Land depended on ‘doing’ the covenant commands.  Moreover, it depended, not in keeping them approximately, but completely.  They must be careful to do, ‘the whole commandment’. The curses of a broken covenant fall on those who fail to do ‘all‘ the commandments of the Lord (Ex 15:26; Lev 26:14,15; Deut 5:29; 6:2; 13:18; 27:26; Gals 3:10).

Ezekiel reiterates the covenant conditions to those of his day.  That life depends on obedience could scarcely be clearer.

Ezek 18:5-9 (ESV)
“If a man is righteous and does what is just and right- if he does not eat upon the mountains or lift up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, does not defile his neighbor’s wife or approach a woman in her time of menstrual impurity, does not oppress anyone, but restores to the debtor his pledge, commits no robbery, gives his bread to the hungry and covers the naked with a garment, does not lend at interest or take any profit, withholds his hand from injustice, executes true justice between man and man, walks in my statutes, and keeps my rules by acting faithfully-he is righteous; he shall surely live, declares the Lord God.

Indeed, Ezekiel states a principle that Paul reiterates in the NT – that judgement (life or death) is according to works (Roms 2:6-10).

Ezek 18:21-24 (ESV)
“But if a wicked person turns away from all his sins that he has committed and keeps all my statutes and does what is just and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the transgressions that he has committed shall be remembered against him; for the righteousness that he has done he shall live. Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, declares the Lord God, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live? But when a righteous person turns away from his righteousness and does injustice and does the same abominations that the wicked person does, shall he live? None of the righteous deeds that he has done shall be remembered; for the treachery of which he is guilty and the sin he has committed, for them he shall die.

In Ezekiel 20, the Lord tells how Israel had been warned in her infancy that God’s blessing depended on obedience – ‘if a person does them he shall live’ – yet Israel had disobeyed and God’s judgements had fallen on them in the wilderness – that generation did not enter the Land.  In Ezekiel’s day similar failure meant exile from the land; life in the land was contingent on obedience… this do and live.

Ezek 20:10-13 (ESV)
So I led them out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness. I gave them my statutes and made known to them my rules, by which, if a person does them, he shall live. Moreover, I gave them my Sabbaths, as a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord who sanctifies them. But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness. They did not walk in my statutes but rejected my rules, by which, if a person does them, he shall live; and my Sabbaths they greatly profaned. “Then I said I would pour out my wrath upon them in the wilderness, to make a full end of them. (Cf Ezek 20:21)

So unable are Israel to keep the covenant and thus gain life that Ezekiel foresees (as did Moses in Deut 30) a new covenant.  In this New Covenant God would allot by grace what Israel could not achieve by works.

Ezek 37:14 (ESV)
And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the Lord.”

The key point of the New Covenant is that any ‘doing’ that is required, God does it.

Sometimes it is suggested that the life promised in the OT is simply temporal life in the land and not eternal life.  In one sense, this mistake is understandable for the OT perspective on life and death is in the main physical and this-worldly.  However, by the NT, the understanding of life and death has considerably enlarged.  Life in its fulness is ‘eternal life‘ and likewise death, is ‘eternal death‘.  Jesus’ discussion with the lawyer who hoped to trip him makes this plain.

Luke 10:25-28 (ESV)
And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”

Notice the context.  It is clear the discussion is framed within the terms of the OT Sinian Covenant.  The lawyer is thinking of life earned through law-keeping.  He speaks in the language of the Law – ‘what must I do’. That he means ‘do‘ in the sense of law-keeping is clear, for Jesus asks what the Law requires and cites the Lev 18 text ‘do this and live’ (Cf. Matt 19:18).  Yet, the lawyer conceives this law-life not merely as temporal but as ‘eternal life’ (cf. Matt 19:16-25).

Furthermore, in the NT letters, when law-life and faith-life are contrasted, the contrast is not that one is temporal and the other eternal but that one is possible and the other impossible.  Righteousness and the ensuing life cannot be attained by Law for law-keeping is impossible.  The Law does not effect righteousness rather it  exposes and excites sin (Roms 3:20; 7:5).  Righteousness and life are always gifts from God (Roms 3:21-26; 5:17) and come only through faith.  And so Paul writes,

Gal 3:11-12 (ESV)
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.”

and,

Rom 10:5-13 (ESV)
For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. But the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) or “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

This last text is an important one.  For here, in NT language, we have the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant to which Ezekiel alluded (Ezek 37) and of which Jeremiah spoke.

Jer 31:31-33 (ESV)
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Obedience is no longer an impossibility (who shall ascend…descend) but entirely possible (the word is near and in your mouth and heart).  In the Roms 10 text, Paul takes a text from the OT (Deut 30) that refers to the Law (old covenant) and speaks of it as gospel (new covenant). How he can do this must wait a future blog.  The purpose of this post is simply to establish, by glancing at the OT, the truth of Paul’s contention that

Gal 3:12 (ESV)
… the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.”

justification constitutive but also transformative

Have you noticed that in Galatians, a letter written to champion the gospel of justification by faith, that Paul’s first allusion to the gospel defines it not in justification language but redemption language.

Gal 1:3-5 (ESV)
Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

For Paul, as we shall see, the gospel of justification, God’s declaration that we are righteous in Christ, involves nothing less than freedom from the world and all within the world.  God’s justifying verdict effectively delivers the Christian from the old creation and all that enslaves within it and brings us into new creation.  As we read through Galatians we discover that redemption allusions are regularly threaded into Paul’s theme of justification.  Not least redemption from law itself for it belongs to the old order, the world from which justification delivers. In Ch 3 we read,

Gal 3:13 (ESV)
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”-

The metaphor of slavery is clear.   The basic premise is laid out.  At the fall, God ‘imprisoned everything under sin’ (3:22).  Even the Law could not free from sin.  In fact, it only served as a further form of slavery.  Speaking to Jewish believers he  says, ‘we were held captive under law’ (3:23) ‘imprisoned until the coming faith be revealed’ (3:23) the law was ‘our guardian’ (3:24) no better than ‘a slave’ (4:1).  Indeed, in the Law the Jews had been ‘enslaved to the elementary principles of the world’.  The Law belonged to the world that Jesus gave himself to deliver his people from.

Gal 4:3-7 (ESV)
In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God.

Gentiles, as part of the world,  were enslaved too.

Gal 4:8 (ESV)
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods.

And if they made the mistake of embracing the Mosaic Law as part of the gospel then they would simply be exchanging one kind of slavery to the world for another.

Gal 4:9-11 (ESV)
But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.

The gospel of justification by faith redeems ( delivers, frees) from the world and all its powers, including the power of the Law.  Thus Jew and gentile believers were to refuse to put themselves under the authority of the Law and become its slaves (Gals 4:12-31).  Jerusalem (the present) was part of the world and was in slavery.  Christians had been delivered from the world, they belonged to the free ‘Jerusalem above’ (that is, not part of ‘the present evil world’).  Thus, Christians were to

Gal 5:1 (ESV)
For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.

and again

Gal 5:13 (ESV)
For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

Justification freedom in the gospel is radical.  It is freedom from the old life altogether.  Christians are not simply no longer free from Law but are free from enslavement to sin.   They do not live ‘in the flesh’ but ‘in the Spirit’ (5:13-25)

Gal 5:24 (ESV)
And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

They no longer are part of the old world to which they once belonged

Gal 6:13-16 (ESV)
… far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

For Paul so radical is the gospel of justification by faith that it takes us out of the present world altogether and makes us ‘new creation’.

How is this so?  How does justification change our position in this way?  Justification surely is a declaration of righteousness.  Surely that is all it is.  Well, no, it is not.  That declaration of righteousness that justification is was accomplished  through death.  The only way we could be justified is if we died.   The wages of sin are death and that death penalty must be carried out.  Adam was told, ‘the day you eat of it [the forbidden fruit] you shall surely die’.  Death for Adam and  all in Adam cannot be avoided.  The soul that sins must die.  Thus, if we are to be justified it cannot be by avoiding death; it must, in fact, be by the means of death.   And of course, that is precisely what it is.

In Galatians we discover the gospel is about the Lord Jesus Christ, ‘who gave himself for our sins’ (1:3).  It is in the death of Christ we die.  Our justification is in Christ and him crucified for all who look to him in faith are involved in his death.  His condemnation is ours.  His crucifixion is ours.  The wages of sin and the penalty of a broken law that demanded death are fully met at the cross.  There the full penalty is experienced.  In Christ, I die, and so I am justified.  The penalty is death and it has been borne.  I have died and so there is no further charge against me.  I am free.  That is what Paul is saying in Ch 2.

Gal 2:19-20 (ESV)
For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

The law demanded death, and so, in Christ, I died.  I was crucified with Christ.  In him the curse was borne.  But that is not the end.  For Christ rose from the dead, vindicated by his Father (1:1).  And as one united to him I rose too. .  He is the first of a new creation.  He rose to ascend to heaven.  That is, he no longer is part of this world.  In his death he died to this world no longer to be part of it.  He is new creation and I am new creation in him.  I live as a justified one who lives in Christ. I am righteousbecause there is now no charge against me and I share now in the righteous standing of Christ.  I am, in Christ, who gave himself for me,  ‘delivered from this present evil world’.  I am no longer under the control of the flesh, sin, Satan, law, or death.  The life I live, I live ‘unto God’.  That is to serve and honour him and no other.

Justification is by way of death and resurrection.  It takes me out of the world in death and then sends me into the world in resurrection as an ambassador of the new world to which I belong.

John 17:6-19 (ESV)
“I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. … And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. … They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world…  As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.

Thus, in the final analysis, justification is not simply constitutive, it is transformative, for it translates from this world through death into the next world and life.   Justification through death and resurrection  transforms (reconstructs) our relationship to everything; to this world and the next, sin, death, Satan, Law, and God.   This and nothing less, is involved in Paul’s gospel of justification by faith in Galatians.

PS

I am not for a moment suggesting that justification is not a verdict outside of ourselves; our righteousness is imputed.  Nor do I wish to support an imparted righteousness which is more about Christ in us (sanctification) than us in Christ; our status in Christ is not our practical sanctification.  Yet, in Christ, the new status of  justification involves resurrection  (Gals 1:1; Roms 4:25); it constitutes , a new position, a new relationship, a new reality; a new life; this is God’s work not ours.  From this newly constituted reality godliness will flow (sanctification)… nevertheless I live…yet not I but Christ lives in me (Gals 2:20)

flesh and spirit in romans, and beyond (5)

If you look at the preceeding blogs on this topic you will be better placed to grapple with the issues in this one.  The fundamental point made is that Christians ought to view themselves not as ‘in the flesh’ but as ‘in the Spirit’.  This is a biblical distinction between two realms or two worlds.  According to the Bible, the Christian belongs to the world or realm of the Spirit and not that of the flesh (Roms 8:1-16).  This, we should note, is not a distinction between a material world and a non-material world – a Gnostic and Greek distinction and not a biblical one.  The World to Come to which believers now belong will be a material world.  Jesus in resurrection had a material body.  It was composed of flesh and bones.  But it was a resurrection body, energized and enlivened by the Spirit, and not what the Bible calls a ‘natural’ body. In a fundamental way Christ’s resurrection put him beyond what the Bible calls ‘the days of his flesh’ (Hebs 5:7).  In his death, he died to life in the old world forever.  He now lives as the First of a new creation spiritually sustained (Roms 1:3,4).  He was put to death in the flesh but lives in the Spirit (1 Pet 3:18).  In fact, the very forces in the flesh to which Christ subjected himself, he now rules (1 Pet 3:21, 22; Eph 1:21, 22; Col 2:10).

We too have died to life in the flesh, in him.  We are to consider ourselves as dead to all that belonged to that old world (removed from its claims, authorities and powers) and alive to God (1 Pet 4:6).   In the last blog we noted we are to consider ourselves, in Christ, dead to sin but alive to God. (Roms 6:1-14).  In Christ, and the resurrection life that is ours in him, the authorities and powers to which we were once subject in the flesh no longer have authority, in fact they become our servants.  Thus Paul can say, ‘All things are yours… and you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s (1 Cor 3:21,22).

freedom from the law

Most Christians (perhaps especially many in avowedly Reformed churches) grasp what Paul is saying in Roms 6.  They understand they are no longer slaves of sin (though they are often unclear as to why).  They find it much harder to accept the teaching of Roms 7.  For if Roms 6 teaches us that through our death in Christ we are freed from the rule of sin, then Roms 7 teaches us that for the same reason, our death in Christ, we are free from the rule of law.  The Law, that is the Mosaic Law, has no rights, no claim in any shape or form on the Christian.  A contention Paul bases on a premise stated in the opening verse of the chapter.

Rom 7:1 (ESV)
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?

Paul takes it as axiomatic, as self-evident to any who understand the law, that it (Mosaic or indeed any other) has authority over a person only as long as he lives.  When we die the voice of law is silenced.  You cannot tell a dead man to love the Lord his God.  You cannot tell a corpse he must not commit adultery or steal or covet.  The very notion is nonsense.  The dead person is beyond the claims and rules of the law. And of course Paul’s point is simple; having died with/in Christ believers are in precisely this position.  The Law has no jurisdiction over them.  Let me put it bluntly, you cannot tell a Christian he must keep the Ten Commandments for he is no longer alive in the world where these are authoritative.

Now to many such a statement is horrifying, even heretical.  It seems antinomian.  It seems a licence to sin.  Well of course, antinomianism was precisely the charge brought against Paul’s gospel (Roms 3:7,8; 6:1).  The immediate instinct of the flesh is to look for rules.  And so some say, well while the law cannot justify us, nor perhaps has the power to sanctify us, nevertheless it remains an authority in the life of the believer as a ‘rule of life’.  We must live by its commands.  I have already addressed some of these issues in a previous blog and don’t intend to go over them here.  See the previous blog for its points are pertinent.

However, two points at least must be made.

Firstly,  it is not I who asserts the law has no commanding authority over the believer; it is Scripture.  Those who wish to impose the law in some way on believers must by-pass Romans and Galatians (and of course some try to do just this). They must relativize what the Scripture teaches as absolute, namely, that the believer has died to the law.  Romans 7 has been a battle ground for centuries.  Christians argue over what it teaches, especially who Paul refers to in the later part of the chapter.  However, it is clear that whoever Paul may be describing in the latter part of the chapter and whatever the details of the main body of the chapter teach, the opening section of the chapter is fairly plain and relatively uncontested.  Indeed it is a summary statement of Paul’s is teaching regarding the believer and the law and the rest of the chapter is simply an exposition of it.  If we can grasp the meaning of the opening section 7;1-6 then it is the key to interpreting the whole.

What is Paul’s opening statement?  We read:

Rom 7:1-6 (ESV)
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? For 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. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.

Paul’s point is plain.  Marriage is a contract (a covenant!) broken only by death.  In the death of the believer with Christ his contractual obligations to the law finished and so he is freed to enter a new marriage (covenant!) and submit to a new husband (authority!).  We cannot submit to the law and Christ.  We can be obligated to one or the other but not both.  Thus Christians (especially Jewish Christians) must understand that they were not obligated to the demands of the Mosaic Covenant; they were now married to Christ. We are ‘released’ from the law, not in part, but completely.  Nothing could be plainer.

Why are so many, especially reformed Christians, afraid of this?  Well, as I have said above, they are afraid it will lead to licence to sin.  It is ironic, for exactly the opposite is the case. And this brings us to the second point which is: only when we are free from the law and find life in Christ alone do we actually produce fruit for God. Christ is not only the basis of our righteousness (justification) and the strength for righteousness (sanctification) but he is also the measure of righteousness.  If we want to see what a godly life looks like we find it in the gospel of Christ – in all that is involved in his life, death and resurrection.

What we are in Christ is our rule of life.  Not the law.  This is precisely Paul’s point in Galatians 6.  In a book where Paul has been strenuously combatting all ideas of the Law having claims of any kind on believers he says:

Gal 6:14-16 (ESV)
But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

What rule?  The rule of the law?  No, the rule of living as someone who is dead, who is crucified with Christ and is a new creation.  Weigh Paul’s words well.  Weigh well too the argument of the book in which they are found.  Is Paul antinomian?  Is the gospel of new creation antinomian?  Is it indifferent to sin?  Of course not.  Perish the thought.  It is only the gospel that can deal with sin and only the gospel that can produce holiness.  Thus again and again when exhorting to holy Christian living Paul’s reference point is not the Law but the grace of God in the gospel.  Paul lays it out clearly to Titus:

Titus 2:11-14 (ESV)
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 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.

It is the gospel that trains in righteousness and not the Law.  I wrote an article some time ago that is really just a scout through the NT showing how text after text takes us to the gospel as our impetus and paradigm for holiness.  It can be found here.  The evidence to my mind is compelling, indeed incontrovertible.  Rarely do the writers of the epistles cite the Ten Commandments (only a part of the law I know, but the part many wish to insist is authoritative) in the context of holy living, and when they do, as an example and never as an authority in the life of the Christian.

does it matter?

Is this issue no more than a fight over words?  No it’s not.  It is important for it affects profoundly how we think of ourselves as Christians and so how we live as Christians. Below are some examples.

• Living by a ‘rule’ mentality is sub-Christian.  We give children a list of rules not adults.  Adults have maturity and are act appropriately not because of imposed rules but because they have character, insight and wisdom.  This is precisely Paul’s point in Gals 3:23-4:6.  Christians who live with a ‘rule’ mentality are likely to remain immature in faith.
• A ‘law’ mentality keeps a distance between us and God.  Those who think about living by the moral law have not fully grasped what it means to have God as Father.  ‘Law’ implies a Judge.  Judges make laws.  Kings make laws, not fathers.  Again this is Paul’s reasoning in Galatians 3:23-4:6.  A Father/Son relationship is not built upon laws to be obeyed but upon, ‘I delight to do your will’ and ‘all that the Father has given me to do will I not do’.  It is not a question of ‘laws’ or ‘law’ but doing the will of the Father.  It is a relationship based on reciprocated love not a legal obedience.  Language such as ‘living by the moral law or Ten Commandments’ undercuts this relationship.  It introduces fear where fear should be absent (1 Jn 4:18)
• An example of the above is the often repeated claim that when we sin as Christians the law is God’s instrument to accuse us so that we flee back to Christ.  But is this true Christian reasoning?  When we sin, is God’s method to send in the law as a ‘heavy’ to bring us back into line?  Is he really standing ready to ‘accuse’ us when we fail?  The whole point of Roms 5-8 is to refute such thinking.  The argument of these chapters is that God does not ‘accuse us’.  He justifies us.  Who then accuses us (Roms 8).  It is true that when we sin the Spirit comes and prompts us and convicts us.  He may do so from the Word or apart from the Word.   But while he convicts he does not accuse.  There is something legal (the law) and even antagonistic (Satan) in accusation.  Fathers’ chide, discipline, teach, train etc but they do not accuse.  Again, ‘accusation’ is language and concept that puts us on sub-Christian ground.  Moreover yet again the assumption is that the law can do what the gospel cannot.  It is the gospel that convicts us of sin and not the Law.  Paul’s fundamental argument against sinning is not that sin for a believer is wrong because the law forbids it but incongruous because it is opposed to the gospel.  How can we who have died to sin live any longer therein? (Roms 6).
• We may well ask too, in connection with the above point, are we really saying that the Law is more powerful than the gospel to create conviction of sin?  Are we saying that where the gospel has failed (to produce conviction and repentance) the law will succeed?  Is the shadow stronger than the reality?  Surely not.  If a ‘believer’ wilfully resists the gospel and acts rebelliously then the law is no help.  In Hebrews, the writer’s conclusion is that if they resist and reject the word of salvation in Christ then there is no further hope.  It is impossible to renew unto repentance those who reject the gospel (Hebs 6:6).
• Law is a poor teacher in holiness because it tells us more about what we ought not to do than what we ought to do.  Further, it provides us with a standard but no example.  One more reason why the NT focus in holiness is Christ.  To quote but one example: ‘By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.’ (1 Jn 2:5,6).  I also doubt if the standard of righteousness the Law requires is as high as the life that the gospel displays.  Did the Law demand that we go the second mile?  Did the Law command us to love our enemies?   Did the Law command that we forgive as God in Christ has forgiven us?  Does the law demand that we lay down our lives for our brothers?

The fact is, the Law was given to man in the flesh (Roms 7:5: Gals 3:3).  It assumes unregeneracy (this do and you shall live).  It is not for those in the Spirit who relate to God on a completely different level than Law.  They belong to a realm or world where Law has no claim, no jurisdiction, no accusatory rights, no voice.  To grasp this is vital if we are to live with a proper gospel perspective on our relationship to God.  Paul says:

Gal 5:1 (ESV)
For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (the yoke he refers to is the law)

and again

Gal 5:13-14 (ESV)
For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

and again

Gal 5:16 (ESV)
But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.

and again

Gal 6:14-16 (ESV)
But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

This blog does not address all the issues of this topic.  By no means.  However, I hope what has been said helps to give us a clearer biblical focus.  Far too often thinking on this issue echoes confessions rather than Scripture.

the hope of righteousness

Gal 5:5 (ESV)
For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.

It is worth a comment or two on this text.  Some, like N T Wright, suggest ‘the hope of righteousness’ refers to future justification.  It may well do so, and I am not prepared to assert dogmatically it does not.  In the past I have been attracted to this interpretation   However, in the context of Galatians, it is not the most comfortable interpretation.  Neither is it a necessary interpretation.  The question is whether the ‘hope’ is predicated on righteousness or is the promise of righteousness? Is righteousness the ground of the hope or the object of the hope?  Galatians, and the somewhat parallel context of Romans, suggest the former.

In Galatians, until and beyond this point, righteousness is always viewed as our present possession by faith.  That is the bedrock of the book.  Paul champions in Galatians ‘justification by faith’.  This justification, or righteousness, is always (excluding only this text) a present possession.  The idea of future justification is foreign to the letter.  This does not mean that ‘the hope of righteousness’ cannot refer to future justification but it certainly makes it much less probable.

Furthermore,when Galatians projects into the future it is to describe believers as heirs (Gals 3:29; 4:7, 30).  Their promised inheritance is the Kingdom of God (Gals 5:21).  Now, no doubt inheriting the Kingdom includes the final vindication of God’s people as righteous just as Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation (his inheriting the Kingdom) included his vindication as being righteous, however, for him (1 Pet 1:21) and for us it includes so much more.

In Romans the Christian ‘hope’ is a ‘hope of glory‘ (Roms 5:2).  This ‘hope’ , as in Galatians, is founded upon righteousness.

Rom 5:1-2 (ESV)
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith…  we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Furthermore, Romans explains that justification by faith creates Spirit-filled sons of God who are heirs of ‘glory’. (Note too, our union with Christ creates the parallel with Christ noted above.)

Rom 8:14-17 (ESV)

For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God… you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs-heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

Paul expands on this ‘glory’ in the following verses

Rom 8:18-25 (ESV)
For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

The ‘hope’ is nothing short of complete glorification.  It is no less than a completely regenerated universe in which God’s people enter into the full and presently unimaginable inheritance God intends.

For Paul, in Romans, the sequence is clear: righteousness by faith; Spirit-filled adoption as sons; and heirs of glory.  The elements in the Galatians text closely parallel Romans and so provide a strong supposition that the sequence also does.

Gal 5:5 (ESV)
For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.

All this in a context of sonship established in the previous chapter.  In the light of this it seems a mistake, I think, to do as Wright does, and use this text to bolster a two-stage justification.  To posit a two-stage justification is not, I think, the intention of the phrase, ‘the hope of righteousness’.  At the very best righteousness in the future is but the public vindication of a verdict from the past, a verdict achieved at the cross that becomes ours when we believe in Christ.  However, let me repeat, Paul’s ‘hope’ that faith-righteousness generates is more embracing, it is the ‘hope of glory‘ .  A hope certain and sure for it is based on God’s own initiative in saving and a present declaration of righteousness.

Rom 8:29-30 (ESV)
For those whom he foreknew he also predestined…  And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

the law of Christ

Gal 6:2 (ESV)
Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

For Paul to speak of the Christian life in terms of a ‘law’ is unusual.  Paul doesn’t normally speak of the Christian life as ‘law’ (nor do most other NT writers) largely because ‘law’ conveys wrong idea about who a Christian is and what Christian obedience means.  We are not, as ‘law’ suggests, a national theocracy restrained and controlled by legislation  but sons of a Father with family likeness created by his indwelling Spirit (Gals 4, Roms 8).  We obey not as slaves but as sons, not as children but as adults (Gals 4:1-4).

Why then does Paul speak of the Christian life as fulfilling ‘the law of Christ‘ in Galatians?

The context of Galatians supplies the answer.  The Galatian threat is a pressure group who wish to make the Law of Moses (or at least parts of it) binding on gentile believers.  Paul is utterly opposed and determined to make crystal clear that the Mosaic Covenant of Law is not in any way authoritative in the life of a believer.  Despite its promise of life it has neither the power to begin life, that is, justify (Gals 2-4),  nor sustain life, that is, sanctify (Gals 5,6).  To impose it is to preach ‘another gospel’ and is damnable (Gals 1:6-8).  So forceful is his dismissal of any attempt to integrate Law and gospel that he becomes exposed to the charge of antinomianism (a charge any true preaching of the gospel is likely to draw).  And so, presumably to forestall such a charge, he refers to the Christian life as fulfilling the ‘law of Christ’.

By so doing he establishes both continuity and discontinuity between Law and gospel.  The continuity is that although the Christian is not under the authority of the Law, nevertheless, he is not without authority.  He is answerable and under obligation, and in this sense is ‘under law’.  He makes a similar point in 1 Cor 9

1Cor 9:19-23 (ESV)
For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 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. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

The discontinuity (in both Galatians 6:2 and 1 Cor 9:20-22) is that the authority to which he must answer is not Moses but Messiah; he is ‘under’ Christ, not ‘Law’.  That Paul is at pains to stress the difference implies there is a difference and that it is important.  The question that naturally arises is: what is the difference?  The answer is complicated but at least two differences merit highlighting.

The first is that the OT Law is given to people ‘in the flesh‘ whereas the ‘law of Christ‘ is to people ‘in the Spirit‘.  The law does not assume spiritual life.  It addresses Israel ‘in the flesh‘ a point that Paul emphasizes repeatedly (Roms 7:5; 8:3; Gals 3:3; 4:21-28).  That it does not assume spiritual life should be obvious for the Law promises life to those who obey it.  ‘This do and you will live’ is the principle of the Law (Roms 10:5; Gals 3:11,12; Luke 10:27,28; Lev 18:1-5).  Life is the goal of the Law not its ground. Life is predicated on obedience not vice versa.   Thus, it should come as no surprise that the Law is principally about restraining ‘flesh’ not prompting spiritual desires.  It addresses the evil in the natural heart  not the good in the renewed.   The Decalogue forbids idolatry, theft, murder, immorality, covetousness etc all activities of the flesh (Gals 5:19-21).  This is why Paul says of the Law in 1 Timothy,

1Tim 1:8-10 (ESV)
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.

The gospel, however, gives spiritual life and its obligations are to people who are ‘alive in Christ’.  The ‘law of Christ’ is consequently not about restraining the flesh but directing life in the Spirit. In one sense, it is probably true to say that every NT exhortation to godliness is an example of ‘the law of Christ’, however, in Galatians, Paul focuses on one example, perhaps because it so epitomizes what the ‘law of Christ’ is.  He describes Christian obedience as believers bearing each other’s burdens.

Gal 6:2 (ESV)
Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

To be under the authority of Christ is to produce the life of the Spirit that he himself revealed while here on earth.  If you like, the ‘rule of life’ for the believer is not the Law of Moses, but the life of Christ in utter self-giving obedience to the Father and self-sacrifice for others.  Christ was the supreme exponent of burden-bearing.  His constant invitation was,

Matt 11:28 (ESV)
Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Peter said of him,

Acts 10:38 (ESV)
God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.

His constant interest was the need of others, especially the weak and helpless.  Christians overcome the flesh when by the power of the Spirit they reach out with this Christ-like love to others, serving those in need, especially, though not exclusively, doing good to those of ‘the household of faith‘ (Gals 6:10).  Self-giving love is the key.  Paul sums up the Christian life as, ‘faith working through love‘ (Gals 5:6).  We are free from the Mosaic Law precisely so that by the Spirit we may ‘in love serve one another’ (Gals 5:13).  The fruit of the spirit is love (Gals 5:22) and when, led by the Spirit, submitting to his promptings and inclining, we live the life of faith, we live the life to which the Law pointed and aspired (Gals 5:14).  Paul says of this Spirit-directed life,

Gal 5:22-23 (ESV)
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

Notice, there is no hard, critical, censorious attitude towards others in a life lived in the Spirit, rather all is kindness, goodness and love.  Love does not, of course, imply softness.  Love may require confronting the sin of another but Spirit-filled love will confront the sin of another with gentleness and a humility knowing that we too can be so tempted ( Gal 6:1).  Such qualities and behaviour fulfils ‘the law of Christ’ and as we walk by the Spirit producing these neither the Law of Moses, nor for that matter any other law, can bring any accusation or prohibition.

the righteous shall live by faith (2)

Hab 2:4 (ESV)
…the righteous shall live by his faith.

Many scholars maintain that ‘faith’ in Hab 2:4 really should be translated ‘faithfulness.  The reason given is twofold.  Firstly, the Hebrew noun ‘emunah‘ used in Hab 2:4 is normally translated ‘faithfulness’ in the OT ; secondly, the OT doesn’t normally sharply distinguish between faith and faithfulness.  Both claims are largely true; ‘emunah‘ does it seems normally mean faithfulness and the OT does not normally sharply distinguish between faith and faithfulness.  In fact, faith is seldom explicitly mentioned in the Pentateuch; usually it is implicit in the narrative.  For example, in Gen 12, God tells Abraham to leave Ur of the Chaldees and the narrative simply tells us he does so.  We (rightly) assume  Abraham’s faith from his obedience (Hebs 11:8).  In reality, the conceptual distinction between faith and obedience (faithfulness), somewhat ambiguous in the OT, is not fully explicit until the NT.  Indeed, arguably the giving of the Law (the Mosaic Covenant) to a degree at least hid the priority of faith (for the Law was not based on the principle of faith Gals 3:12) until its fulness is revealed in Christ.  Something like this seems to be implied in Paul’s words in Galatians.

Gal 3:23-26 (ESV)
Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith.

It is not that faith was not present in the OT, far from it, for only by faith are any justified at any time (Roms 4).  Furthermore, Hebrews is clear both that only people of faith please God (Hebs 11:6) and that such faith was at work in OT believers (Hebs 11). Yet, undoubtedly, the NT revelation clarifies and defines faith in a way that few OT texts do.

Having said this, while few OT texts distinguish between faith and faithfulness and while ‘emunah‘ normally means faithfulness, it goes too far to argue no OT text focuses explicitly on faith and to insist that ‘emunah‘ must always mean ‘faithfulness’.  Such a case cannot be made.  For three reasons.

The Philological Reason

Few scholars, I think, would insist that ‘emunah‘ must inevitably be translated faithfulness.  They would admit both meanings (faith and faithfulness) to be possible.   Moreover, the verb form of the noun ‘emunah‘ is ‘aman‘ or ‘believe’ which is very similar conceptually to ‘faith’, that is, it emphasizes trust rather than trustworthiness.  In fact, the key OT text alongside Hab 2:4 used in the NT to stress faith as a trust in God rather than trustworthiness of character uses the verb form of ‘emunah‘.  We read in Gen 15:6

Gen 15:6 (ESV)
And he [Abraham] believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.

Furthermore the Greek version of the OT (LXX) translates ‘emunah‘ by ‘pistis‘ a word that regularly means ‘faith’ in the NT.  The point of this brief discussion is simply to establish that it is appropriate to translate ‘emunah‘ as ‘faith’ if the context so merits.  Clearly Paul the apostle (presumably no mean C1 Hebraist) believes the context of Hab 2:4 does so merit for in the two occasions he cites Hab 2:4 in the NT, he does so to emphasize the priority of faith rather than faithfulness.

The Analogical Reason

Biblical theology is a very helpful disciple but one of its weaknesses is it tends to undermine what older theologians called the ‘analogy of faith’. By this they asserted the unity of Scripture and thus the ability of one scripture to interpret (shed light) on another.  By the analogy of faith we can say that the uses of Hab 2:4 in the NT shed light on its OT meaning. Paul cites Hab 2:4 on two occasions.  The first is in Roms 1:17.  It is an important text for Paul is laying out in Roms 1:16,17 the essence of the gospel. He affirms that the gospel reveals the righteousness of God and is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes and cites Hab 2:4 as proof of his assertion.  That Paul’s interpretation of ‘emunah‘  is faith rather than faithfulness is evident from ch 3 where he further explains the gospel and stresses faith as God’s instrument of justification.

Rom 3:21-26 (ESV)
But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it- the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Paul’s second use of Hab 2:4 is Gals 3.  The chapter begins by Paul asking the Galatians a rhetorical question; have they received the Spirit (become new covenant people) by the works of the Law or the hearing of faith?  He asserts that the blessings and power of the Spirit among them is by faith.  Like Abraham they have been counted righteous through belief (3:6).  The law however is not of faith (3;12) and no one is justified by relying on the works of the law (3:10-12) and one important reason for this is the Hab 2:4 assertion, ‘the righteous shall live by faith‘ (Gal 3:11).

For Paul Hab 2:4 is a critical OT text for supporting his contention (with his judaizing opponents) that faith in God’s gospel word of  promise (Gals 3:8) is the means of salvation and not ‘works of the law’.

The Exegetical Reason

What of Hab 2:4?  Can it bear the weight that Paul places on it?  Is it legitimate to understand ‘emunah‘ as ‘faith in this text’?  The context must decide.  And it seems clear that the context supports Paul’s interpretation.  God has told Habakkuk that Israel (because of her disobedience) is soon to be overrun by the Babylonians (the Chaldeans).  The nation will lose their land and all that God had given them.  They would live as exiles in Babylon.  During this time of exile they would have only the promise of the Lord that he would bring his salvation and deliver them upon which to hope and cling.  In Hab 2:4 the hubris of the Babylonian who trusts in his own strength (his soul is puffed up) revealing his unrighteousness (it is not upright within him) contrasts with the heart of the righteous who humbly live by faith in God’s promise of deliverance (the righteous live by faith).  Habakkuk’s prayer in Ch 3 epitomizes this remnant faith in exile. It focuses not on Habakkuk’s faithfulness but on Habakkuk’s faith that God will be faithful to his promise.  It is a classic example of OT faith.  Habakkuk focuses on God and God’s great saving acts in the past for his people (3:3-16). Reflecting on these reinforces his faith in God’s promised redemption in the future and so he confesses in faith, even as his heart trembles at the prospect of the coming judgement,

Hab 3:16-19 (ESV)
I hear, and my body trembles; my lips quiver at the sound; rottenness enters into my bones; my legs tremble beneath me. Yet I will quietly wait for the day of trouble to come upon people who invade us.  ​​​​​​​​Though the fig tree should not blossom, nor fruit be on the vines, the produce of the olive fail and the fields yield no food, the flock be cut off from the fold and there be no herd in the stalls,  ​​​​​​​​yet I will rejoice in the Lord; I will take joy in the God of my salvation.  ​​​​​​​​God, the Lord, is my strength; he makes my feet like the deer’s; he makes me tread on my high places.

Thus Habakkuk exemplifies ‘the righteous who live by faith’.

Conclusion

In fact, Habakkuk’s text is clearly eschatological. It is a vision about ‘the end’ (2:2).  It looked forward to the salvation that will arrive in Messiah which is one more reason why Paul employs Hab 2:4 in Romans and Galatians.  Of course, while it means predominantly ‘faith’ and not ‘faithfulness’ and focuses on our faith in God more than our faithfulness to God, yet nevertheless ‘faithfulness’ is never far away.  For in the OT and the NT faith is not merely of the moment.  It is no transitory thing.  Faith endures, perseveres, persists.  Faith is steadfast.  This is the faith that Habakkuk will require, a steadfast faith through days of judgement and exile.  He will live righteously by living in daily faith, waiting for the Lord to deliver as he promised. Habakkuk will live by faith.

It is this aspect of steadfast faith that is present in the third citation of Hab 2:4 in the NT.  In Hebrews the believers face ongoing persecution.  The writer says their situation calls for endurance in faith.  He writes,

Heb 10:36-39 (ESV)
For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. For, “Yet a little while, and the coming one will come and will not delay;  ​​​​​​​​but my righteous one shall live by faith, and if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him.”  But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.

God’s deliverance may take time and must be waited for (Hab 2:3).  True faith holds firm and does not shrink back, it remains faithful; the just shall live by faith, but that faith will be steadfast.

Col 1:21-23 (ESV)
And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.

the righteous shall live by faith (1).

Hab 2:4 (ESV)
“… the righteous shall live by his faith.

This short text, even part of a text, would be easy to miss while reading Habakkuk and the OT.  Yet, to do so would be a mistake for it is a text that has key significance in the NT.  It is cited no less than three times in the NT and in one of these citations is a key OT proof for the Christian gospel of justification by faith.  Romans is a pivotal book in the NT.  Few dispute this.  Few dispute that Roms 1:16,17 is a pivotal text in Romans-  and nestling in this text is Hab 2:4.  Paul writes,

Rom 1:15-17 (ESV)
So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.  For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”

The text from Habakkuk completes and underscores Paul’s summary of the gospel.  Needless to say, because this OT text is so germane to the gospel it has come under a lot of scrutiny and generated lots of debate.  I will not attempt to engage with all the debate.  My more modest aim is to mention a couple of contemporary opinions and suggest some reasons for accepting the traditional view as the correct one.

Before doing so let me make one general observation. It is all too easy for ordinary folks to dip into the world of biblical studies and think that the issues discussed or so beyond us that we may as well give up before we start.  This is a mistake.  The books of the Bible were written (in the main) neither  by scholars, nor were they written to scholars.  The Bible is for the church not the academy.  We may be thankful for scholarship while remembering that scholars are as skilled at misunderstanding Scripture and fudging it as they are at understanding and clarifying  it.  Often high sounding phrases, technical jargon, many words and confident assertion are a mask for the insubstantial and unbelief.   Often long dissertations, calculated to impress the world of academia, can be reduced to a few statements requiring evaluation, evaluation that any Spirit-led student of  God’s word is competent to make.  Let me say again, I am not despising scholarship, far from it, I simply refuse to idolize it or be daunted by it.

The traditional understanding of Roms 1:16,17 is that Paul, backed by Hab 2, views faith in God’s gospel word as God’s appointed means of salvation.  This, however, is challenged today.  One main challenge is mounted; faith in Romans we are told should be translated faithfulness for that is its meaning in Hab 2:4.  Faithfulness in Hab 2 is to be understaood as as ‘our faithfulness’, or ‘God’s faithfulness’ or perhaps ‘Christ’s faithfulness on our behalf’.  The latter understanding is tied up to a particular understanding of ‘the faith of Jesus Christ’ that is quite trendy at the moment.  In a future blog I may well try to grapple with it, however, at the moment I want simply to consider the main contention that it is a mistake in Hab 2 to understand ‘faith’ as ‘faith in God’s Word’ instead it must be understood as ‘faithfulness to God’s Word’.

The issues are big.  We should understand that if in Hab 2:4 faith must mean faithfulness then Paul must also mean ‘faithfulness’ in these occasions in Romans when we have understood him to speak of ‘faith’.  Clearly if the gospel is construed as ‘faithfulness to God’s Word’ rather than ‘faith in God’s Word‘ a sea change in the gospel has taken place.  The emphasis shifts from God’s work to our work, from God’s activity to our activity.  The gospel morphs into law; it becomes works not faith.  Of course, faith can be viewed holistically and often is.  When it is, faith and faithfulness effectively merge.  Or, to put it another way, faith and obedience become one.

In one sense, of course, faith and faithfulness are ‘one’.  Paul describes the gospel as ‘the obedience of faith‘ at the beginning and end of Romans.  It is impossible to have true faith without faithfulness or obedience and it is impossible to have faithfulness and obedience without faith.  However, in an earlier blog I argued that while faith and obedience are intimately connected they are in Paul’s thought distinguishable as the phrase, ‘the obedience of faith‘ itself implies.  Moreover, they must be kept distinct if the clarity and vitality of the gospel is not to be lost . So yes, faith and faithfulness belong together, but no, Paul is not referring to faith as faithfulness in Roms 1:16,17; he refers to faith as faith and sees Hab 2:4 as backing this claim.  With this background, we are ready to consider Hab 2:4.

Hab 2:4 (ESV)
“… the righteous shall live by his faith.

In the following blog we shall do just this.

what was wrong with C1 judaism?

What was wrong with C1 Judaism? Was anything wrong? There must have been something wrong since Israel rejected her Messiah.

About what was wrong, scholars are divided. Surprise, surprise! The traditional answer (the old perspective) is Judaism was legalistic; it taught salvation by works. The modern answer ( the new perspective) is it was nationalistic; it saw salvation in Jewish ethnicity.

We should be grateful for scholarly research but never in thrall to it. The final and certain resource for a Christian is Scripture. There we find, surprise, surprise, that both legalism and nationalism blinded C1 Judaism.

John the Baptist warns the religious leaders not to trust in their ethnicity (…do not say, we have Abraham as our father Matt 3;9) and Jesus tells the parable of the Pharisee and Publican against the Pharisees (who trusted in themselves that they were righteous Lk 18:9-14).

They did not grasp that ‘not all Israel are of Israel’. Nor did they realise that Law was a covenant of works that condemned rather than justified.

They had a false confidence in both their lineage and their law. Tragically, because of this, they failed to recognise their Lord.

the guardian and the helper

In the Roman world, until the son of a wealthy Roman citizen came of age he was overseen by an appointed Guardian.  This Guardian was often a slave in the household.  The Guardian’s duty was to discipline and train the child, and as with any child, this meant in large part laying down rules and regulations. Children are not always given explanations why they should act in certain ways, they are simply told they must.  And children need rules.  They need boundaries and instructions.  Not only do these give security, they also train the child for life. Of course, when the child grew into maturity and could make informed choices for himself these rules were no longer needed, nor was the Guardian.

The Mosaic Law was God’s Guardian for OT Israel, his son.  Israel under the authority of Law was a child under a Guardian (Gals 3,4).  The Law was perfectly suited to its purpose, part of which was to prescribe and proscribe the behaviour of Israel until God brought her to maturity in  New Covenant gospel life.

We who believe the gospel now live in this maturity.  By the indwelling Spirit we have the mature insight and capacity of sons.  No longer are we children confined and cocooned by a set of rules,which by their very nature were rigid, black and white with no nuancing, instead we are Spirit-led sons enabled by Him to live mature, wise and godly lives (Gals 4).

Let me give an example to illustrate what this means.  If I were a believer living in the OT and wanted to play a round of Golf on the Sabbath I would know without asking this was forbidden.  The Law had certain clear commands and rest from activity on the Sabbath was one.  I would only be allowed to walk a certain distance too, certainly not enough for a round of golf.  The Law was treating me like a child.  It was hemming in and controlling my potentially wayward behaviour with a set of rules.  And if I broke these rules, I was in trouble. The Guardian did not spare the rod.

But I’m not a believer living in the OT under Law.  I am a believer in the NT living in the new Age of the Spirit.  I have come to spiritual maturity in that I do not live by outside laws imposed as on a child but as an adult infused by the Holy Spirit and sensitive to his promptings  and directing.  Thus I am not guided by wooden and basic rules but by an inner sensitivity and awareness of God’s will that belongs to spiritual maturity.  So what does that mean?  Does it mean that on a Sunday (for the sake of argument let’s leave aside the differences between the Sabbath and Lord’s day) I am now free to go out and play a game of golf and miss going to church?  Well, yes it may.  There is certainly no rule that says I must not play golf on a Sunday and if I do I will be punished.  I may well have good reasons to play that game of golf.  I may be seriously tired and need the relaxation the round of golf may give.  It may be part of therapy as I recover from an illness.  It may be that there are particular reasons why I must, if at all possible, play that game of golf; it may be my last opportunity to spend time with an unconverted friend who is leaving the country.

On the other hand I may feel like playing the game of golf but decide not to do so.  I may decide that my time would be better spent going to church.  After all  I can play golf another time.  Or I may think, actually, refreshing though the golf may be, I am likely to be more refreshed and relaxed having  fed on God’s word in church.  I may wisely recognise I need the regular habit of church going to remain constant in faith otherwise I am likely to slowly drift.  I may, in fact, only fleetingly think of the benefits of the round of golf because in my heart the prospect of the pleasure and benefit derived from meeting with God’s people far eclipses the golf. It may be to my mind a no-brainer.

And so with a renewed heart and mind daily ‘circumcised’ to serve God and honour him I make the decision that seems most appropriate on the occasion.  And this is how all new covenant believers live by faith.  They do not turn to a set of rules in the Law, rules which, let’s be honest, cannot possibly cover every situation anyway and many of which, if taken as they stand, are inappropriate to life outside of cultural Judaism.  Some Christians are very eager that the Law be a ‘rule of life’ for believers.  But most of the Law cannot be taken this way.   The Ten Commandments it may be argued are more obviously universal.  Well, yes they are (conceding the Sabbath for argument’s sake)  but for most of us, most of the time, most decisions, will be about matters the Ten Commandments don’t directly address.  The Ten Commandments address the more gross sins.  As Paul says, the Law is for thieves and murderers, sodomites, liars etc (1 Tim 1:9,10).  It is intended to restrain gross misconduct not direct the lives of people sensitive to the voice of the Spirit.  The Law, as a rule of life simply isn’t that effective.

If we are no longer children answerable to a Guardian like the Law and are guided by the indwelling Spirit of God, our Helper, does that mean we need not even read the OT Law; is it irrelevant and worthless?  Certainly not. God’s Word in its entirety, properly read and understood within its redemptive-historical setting, by the Spirit can guide and instruct us.  It is part of God’s plan for us as his mature sons that we should become increasingly familiar with his plans and purposes in history.  Children have only an inkling of their father’s activities but full-grown sons are privy to them and share their father’s interests.  Thus Jesus opens the OT Scriptures to his disciples and shows them ‘the things concerning himself’.  As sons learn their father’s ways and become absorbed with his plans increasingly they attune to his will.

And so as gospel sons ‘we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code’.