Test 17: Paul's Relationship to the Law

We will therefore establish Paul's explicit, unambiguous statements first, then interpret his more complex passages in light of them.

UK — Clear Statement Principle:

Section 1.2: Romans 7:7-14 — The Law Identified and Described

Identifying Which Law Paul Discusses

This is not the ceremonial law (sacrifices, feasts). This is not general Mosaic legislation. This is the moral law — identified by Paul's direct quotation.

Paul's Description of This Law

Having identified the moral law, Paul describes its character:

1. Paul writes in present tense: "the law is holy" — not "was holy"
2. He writes after the cross — this is his present assessment
3. He describes the moral law (identified by the 10th Commandment)

UK — Presumption Against Absurdity:

Interpretations that contradict explicit statements are absurd and must be rejected.

Position A claims Paul taught the law was abolished. But Paul, writing after the cross, says the law is holy, just, good, and spiritual. These are not descriptions of something abolished or obsolete. These are descriptions of something that reflects God's eternal character.

Section 1.3: Romans 8:3-4 — The Law's Righteousness Fulfilled in Us

UK — Purposive Interpretation:

The stated purpose of an action or provision illuminates its meaning.

Paul states it explicitly: "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us."

1. The law has "righteousness" — a standard of right conduct
2. This righteousness is to be "fulfilled" — not abolished, but met, expressed
3. Fulfillment occurs "in us" — in believers, through Spirit-empowered obedience

• If the law were abolished, it would have no righteousness to fulfil
• If the law were abolished, there would be nothing to fulfil "in us"
• The very fact that Paul expects the law's righteousness to be fulfilled in believers demonstrates the law continues

Section 1.4: Romans 13:8-10 — Paul Quotes the Ten Commandments

UK — Authoritative Citation:

When an authority is cited as currently valid, it is treated as currently binding.

1. He quotes five of the Ten Commandments by name
2. He presents them to Roman Christians (not Jews) as authoritative
3. He says love "fulfils" (fills full, completes) these commandments — not abolishes them
4. He acknowledges "any other commandment" also applies

Love is the fullness of the law — it fills the law, it does not empty it. The commandments remain; love is how they are kept.

Section 1.5: Summary of Paul's Explicit Statements

UK — Clear Statements Govern Ambiguous Passages:

When interpreting ambiguous language, clear statements on the same subject must guide interpretation.

These six explicit statements establish Paul's position beyond reasonable doubt. Any interpretation of Paul's more complex passages (Romans 6:14, 10:4, Galatians 3:24-25) must be consistent with these clear statements.

If an interpretation of Romans 6:14 contradicts Romans 3:31, the interpretation of Romans 6:14 is wrong — not Romans 3:31.

Section 2.1: Romans 6:14 — "Not Under Law But Under Grace"

1. Under the law's condemnation — bearing its penalty
2. Under law as a system of justification — trying to earn salvation by law-keeping

Romans 6:14-15 context: Freedom from sin's dominion, not freedom to sin

Galatians 4:4-5 — Christ was born "under the law, to redeem them that were under the law" — under its curse

• "Not under law" = not under the law's condemnation
• "Under grace" = under God's favour through Christ

• The law still exists
• The crime is still wrong
• He is not free to commit the crime again

Section 2.2: Romans 10:4 — "Christ is the End of the Law"

1. Goal, aim, purpose — that toward which something is directed
2. Completion, fulfilment — the state of being complete
3. End, termination — the point at which something ceases

Does charity terminate the commandment? No — charity is the goal of the commandment. The commandment leads to charity; it does not cease at charity.

Does "end" here mean termination? No — death and everlasting life are outcomes, not termination points.

Paul is discussing Israel's pursuit of righteousness through law-keeping (Romans 9:30-10:3). Israel failed because they sought righteousness through works, not through faith.

Christ is the goal/purpose of the law for righteousness. The law was always meant to lead us to Christ for righteousness — not to be a means of earning righteousness ourselves.

Section 2.3: Galatians 3:24-25 — "No Longer Under a Schoolmaster"

UK — Purpose-Limited Provisions:

When a provision serves a specific purpose, its termination relates to that purpose, not to other functions.

Paul is addressing one specific issue: justification — how one is made right with God.

We no longer rely on the law for justification. Christ has come; we are justified by faith in Him.

It does not mean the law ceases to exist or to define right and wrong.

Paul quotes Leviticus 19:18 — part of the law — and says it is fulfilled through love. If the law were abolished, there would be nothing to fulfil.

Galatians 5:19-21 — Lists "works of the flesh" including adultery (7th Commandment), idolatry (1st/2nd Commandments), murders (6th Commandment).

Paul identifies violations of the moral law as sins that exclude from God's kingdom. The law clearly still defines sin.

Section 2.4: Galatians 4:9-10 — "Days, Months, Times, Years"

The Galatians were Gentiles — former pagans (Galatians 4:8: "when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods").

Ancient paganism involved elaborate calendar observances:

• Lucky and unlucky days
• Observances tied to lunar months
• Seasonal times for various deities
• Annual years of religious cycles

Section 2.5: Colossians 2:16 — "Sabbath Days" (Addressed in Test 15)

This passage was examined in Test 15. Summary finding: The "sabbath days" of Colossians 2:16 are ceremonial sabbaths (tied to the feast system), known by their ceremonial company (meat, drink, holyday, new moon). The weekly Sabbath of creation is not in view.

Section 3.1: Paul's Personal Conduct

UK — Conduct as Evidence of Belief:

A person's consistent conduct is evidence of their genuine beliefs.

US — Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 406:

Evidence of habit is admissible to prove conduct on a particular occasion.

Acts 13:42, 44 — Paul agreed to preach to Gentiles on the Sabbath when they requested it.

Acts 16:13 — Paul observed the Sabbath by a riverside — outside any synagogue context.

If Paul taught the Sabbath was abolished, why did he:

Section 3.2: Paul's Self-Testimony

• Why would he claim to have done nothing against the law?
• Why would he claim to believe all things in the law?
• These claims would be false if he taught the law was abolished.

Section 4.1: The Key to Understanding Paul

UK — Harmonious Interpretation:

When apparent contradictions exist, interpretation must seek harmony.

Paul addresses the law in two distinct ways:

1. The law cannot justify anyone (negative)
2. The law remains the standard of righteousness (positive)
3. Christ satisfied the law's demands, freeing us from condemnation (salvation)
4. The Spirit enables us to fulfil the law's righteousness (sanctification)

Section 4.2: The Equivocation Fallacy

Logical Fallacy — Equivocation:

Using the same term with different meanings in the same argument produces invalid conclusions.

Position A takes Paul's statements about what the law cannot do (justify) and applies them to what the law is (abolished).

The Evidence Weighed