Skip to main content

Can We Be Saved by Law?

Can we be saved by law? Paul says many times that we are saved by grace, not law. He even says Christ is the end of the law:

Since they [Israel] did not know the righteousness of God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

Romans 10:3‭-‬4 NIVUK
https://bible.com/bible/113/rom.10.3-4.NIVUK.

There are two things we need to think about first, before we jump to conclusions on this issue:

1. The word nomos 'law' could refer to several different things (Gal 2:19 illustrates this point)
2. The word telos 'end/culmination/goal' also needs interpreting

On the first question, Paul, in Romans 10, is likely to be referring to the Mosaic law, with its regulations to offer sacrifices and so on. We cannot be saved by keeping all of the teaching of the Torah. Neither are Jews saved simply by having this teaching. Having a Bible doesn't save you.

On the second, the word telos is likely to mean 'goal/fulfilment' here. Christ is the goal and fulfilment of the teaching found in the Torah. He is the fulfilment of the sacrificial system. Actually the Jews haven't been able to offer sacrifices since the Roman desecration of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70. But both Messianic Jews and Christians  believe Christ's sacrifice was sufficient once for all. Also, if we are to talk about nationalism (i.e. pride in being a Jew), then Abraham is the father of all Jews (and Arabs), and the grandfather of Jacob, who was given the name Israel, and Abraham was promised he would be a blessing to all nations, albeit through his descendent. If you are a Jew, there is no point in being nationalistic and anti-gentile. In fact the Hebrew word for nations is the same as the word for gentiles - goyyim. Abraham's name is a blessing to all, both Jew and gentile.

So can we be saved by law? Yes! By obedience to the law (i.e.teaching) of Christ (Gal 6:2; Jhn 15:1-17). The similarity between Moses and Jesus is that they were both teachers, but Jesus brought (and taught) grace and truth (Jhn 1:16-18). Also, we have been saved, and therefore want to obey, not the other way around. If it were the other way around, it would be us not him. It would be our righteousness not his.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scripture Engagement for Translation Advisors

What do translation advisors need to know about Scripture engagement (SE), and why? Let's look at the 'why' first: Translation advisors (TAs) are often involved in day-to-day exegesis. They help mother-tongue translators (MTTs) prepare drafts. The MTTs they work with might not know Hebrew or Greek. The TAs then take part in the team check of that draft, which involves other MTTs in the project as well as the TA. Sometimes they are also involved in the coordination of the translation programme. They are very busy people. So why do they need to know about SE? Because: The translation is ultimately for an audience that has felt needs that are not being addressed by the translation programme. Analysing and meeting (or helping to meet) the felt needs of the audience should be the first priority of any mission worker, including TAs. Only about 30% of completed translations are well used. The initial set up of the programme needs to take SE into consideration (it's no good wai...
Post a Comment
Read more

One Person's Contextualisation is Another Person's Syncretism

I was in an interesting discussion full of anthropologists the other day. They were discussing syncretism. Most of them were of the view that outsiders cannot decide which practices are syncretistic and which are not. It has to be a decision made by local believers. This is because only local people can create indigenous theologies, that is, interpret Scripture according to the local worldview(s).  Not only that, some practices need to be tolerated in the short term, as we trust that new believers will gradually mature, and realise that those practices need to be weaned out of their lives. This can take time, perhaps years. Outsiders can, however, help local believers through the process of deciding for themselves which practices need to be rejected, which can be accepted, and which need to be modified according to (local formed) principles from Scripture. For example, ancestor practices, which my PhD thesis was on, are often continued by people after they have come to faith. They...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Problems and Pitfalls of Proof-Texting

Why is it wrong to proof-text when making an argument?  Proof-texting is when someone simply quotes a verse from the Bible, out of context, to make a point. This can be in a book, a conversation, an essay, or a sermon, to give some examples. I just did a quick read of some other blogs on this topic, and none of them wowed me, so I thought I'd write my own. Then I had an even better idea: why not get you to tell me why proof-texting is problematic? In other words, I want to crowd-source the problem, and get lots of input. Since it is my suggestion, and I already did some research, let me get the ball rolling. Proof-texting is problematic because: It ignores the original context of the verse. There are actually two types of context: The literary context of the verse, that is, the verse is situated in a passage (that might be making an entirely different point) of Scripture that has a certain genre. For instance, the book of Acts is narrative, which means it is descriptive of what hap...
3 comments
Read more