Works of the law - Lesson 5

The most common interpretation of Paul’s term “law” has been “Old Testament commandments.”  Likewise, terms such as, “works of the law,” “under the law,” and “works” fell into the same category.  As I really studied Galatians, which lead me to read several of Paul’s writings on a deeper level, I became very confused when using this interpretation.  Translating the word law this way just seemed create contradictions within Paul’s own writing.  Paul was a proud Jewish Pharisee and scholar (Acts 23:6, Gal 1:14, Acts 22:3).  It just wasn’t making sense that Paul would write in this letter, and in letters written after this, about his background, being zealous for God, even using phrases supporting the law (Gal 3:21, Rom 7:12, Rom 7:22, Rom 3:31).  He even went so far as to prove, through a purification ceremony in Acts 21:20-26, that he had not abandoned the law.  In Romans 3:31, he specifically makes the point to not throw the law away because of faith.

Paul does not use the terms “works of the law,” “works,” or “under the law” as positive phrases.  The more I read these examples of Paul’s life and his teaching, the more it didn’t make sense when I read terms that appeared to be against the law.  I knew scripture would not contradict itself, so I know there’s an explanation.

In my search, I found that the Greek word nomou was used for different purposes, very much like the translation of the base word for Jew in Galatians 2:14.  Nomou translates directly into English as law.  The problem with that translation, at times, is without understanding the cultural relationship to this word, we think of the word law as a very concrete and flat term.   Imagine using the word law to describe the legal code, washing your hands before eating dinner, holding the door for someone behind you, or always having mom’s pecan pie at Thanksgiving dinner.  One is law, another is hygiene, one courtesy, and another is tradition.  The problem is that some Jewish hygiene, courtesy, and traditions had been considered as important as law, and at times even enforced as such, even though it was not actually law.  So when writing, the word nomou (law) was used to convey this sentiment in the culture at that time.

Once again, in order to understand the point Paul is making, it is imperative to understand the cultural relevance of Jewish living at that time.  Matthew 15:3 and Mark 7:8-9 tell the story of Jesus rebuking certain Pharisees for holding stronger to traditions than God’s written scripture.  We also know that Jesus rebuked the Pharisees when questioning him about picking grain on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28) and healing on the Sabbath (Mark 3:1-6).  The relevance of these passages is exactly the same point that Paul is making.  Traditions had become synonymous or even superseded the scriptural commands.  Tradition had become law.  These traditions had become the yoke of burden that was impossible to bear.  Paul is speaking against this form of law.

In Matthew 23:2-3, Jesus said, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach but do not practice.”  Notice that Jesus specifically affirmed to the crowd to “do and observe whatever they tell you.”  Teaching and being a leader within the synagogue, like Jesus is talking about, required reading directly from the scrolls of Moses, which is what Jesus is telling the crowd to obey.  What he didn’t agree with was the “works they do.” Jesus was teaching the crowd not to follow “the works they do” in the exact same manner that Paul wrote that “a person is not justified by works of the law.”  These two phrases are pointing towards the same teaching.  Pharisaic teaching at that time was to adhere to the “traditions of the elders” (Matthew 15:2) with as much obedience, or more, as one would obey God’s commandments. 

In the last several years, a lot of research and study has been done connecting Paul’s use of the term “works of the law” to a Dead Sea Scroll (MMT) that uses the same phrase in Hebrew, ma-ase ha-Torah.   Martin Abegg, professor of religious studies and co-director of the Dead Sea Scrolls Institute at Trinity Western University in Langley, British Columbia, Canada, expands on the language used within this particular scroll in The Biblical Archeological Society book entitled, “Paul: Jewish Law and Early Christianity.”   (http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/free-ebooks/paul-jewish-law-and-early-christianity/)

·         Hebrew: ma-ase ha-Torah

·         Hebrew to English: precepts of Torah

·         Hebrew to Greek: erga nomou

·         Greek to English: works of [the] law

Abegg explains that the primary teaching within this particular scroll is the understanding of purity laws and the requirement for separating what is pure and not pure.  Abegg explained that the “MMT claims that adherence to the works of the law will be accounted to you as righteousness.”   Abegg further explains that this is the exact theology that Paul was preaching against. 

This segregation law was manmade, potentially under a healthy concern that by associating with Gentiles, whom did not adhere to the laws pertaining to purity, let alone even understand these laws, one would be at risk of touching or consuming something unclean.  Initially due to a legitimate concern or not, the custom or tradition had become equivalent to Jewish law.  Peter speaks of this law in Acts 10:28, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation…”

Paul expresses this argument, not only in Romans 3:21-31, but also in Ephesians 2:14-16, “For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility  by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,  and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.”  These ordinances are the traditions of the elders written into law.

When Paul makes reference to these works of the law, he is doing so in the context of being justified or not.  Paul was directly opposing the theology that these works justified a person or made them righteous.  On this particular point, Paul was using the exact same logic and referencing the same theology that Jesus used when rebuking some of the Pharisees for holding stronger to traditions of man rather than God’s scripture.

It seems that Paul uses the word law for two different purposes.  As explained above, he uses the law to convey the intent that the traditions had become as important as law.  He also uses the word law to reference the laws of Moses (Torah), which he is a strong supporter.  Gal 3:21, Rom 7:12, Rom 7:22, Rom 3:31, Acts 21:20-26

Scripture will not contradict itself.  It is critical to read an entire context of Paul’s writing, and the cultural context of that writing, to understand what he means when he is using the word law.  Depending on the context of the message, law could be translated as traditions of the elders or teachings from Moses (Torah).