What has been manifest and witnessed to by the Law and the Prophets?...

A righteousness from God apart from law.

Let us repeat our earlier comment. We Gentiles have interpreted Paul’s "righteousness of God without the law" to mean, "righteousness of God apart from godly living"—a destructive error.

The following quotation from Taylor (Tyndale House Publishers. Living Letters by Kenneth N. Taylor), quoted in The New Testament from 26 Translations, comments on Romans 3:21: "But now God has shown us a different way to heaven—not by being ‘good enough’ and trying to keep his laws...."

Apart from the fact that finding the way to Heaven is never presented by Paul as being the goal of salvation, nor does going to Heaven have anything to do with the context of Romans 3:21, a Gentile would understand "not by being ‘good enough’ and trying to keep his laws" to mean God has given us a plan of salvation whereby we may live in immorality without affecting our relationship to God.

Not having read enough of Taylor’s work to know whether he takes care of this problem in his text or notes, we do realize we have a good illustration, in this fragment of his commentary, of the manner in which the Apostle Paul has been interpreted.

The expression "the righteousness of God without the law" means vastly more than an imputed (ascribed) righteousness. The righteousness of God without the Law comes as we leave Moses and are married to Christ. Our marriage to Christ, requiring as it does an intense interaction with the living Christ in every detail of life, produces a righteousness of character and behaviour that the Law never could produce.

We leave one source of godly character and behaviour, the Law of Moses observed by a devout heart, and go to another source of godly character and behaviour, which is the forming and dwelling of Christ in us.

When studying Romans, we must keep in mind that Paul had an ongoing battle with Jewish theologians and teachers who were insisting that righteousness could come by the Law of Moses. Some of the Jewish teachers had become Christians and they believed that the new converts must follow Moses as well as Christ. Paul’s argument against mixing Moses with Christ must be seen from this standpoint; otherwise, Paul appears to be saying the grace of the new covenant can function apart from the formation of a new creation.

Paul’s employment of the term works does not refer to upright, godly behaviour, but to the Law of Moses or a similar body of religious observances. The Law of Moses, and the new covenant, have precisely the same objective: to cause us to practice righteousness, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with God.

The difference between the old covenant and the new covenant is not that the old covenant works by the letter and the new covenant works by faith. The eleventh chapter of the Book of Hebrews uses people from the time of Abel to prove to us that no person, under the old covenant or the new, ever pleased God other than by faith.

The people under the old covenant displeased God, attempting to please God apart from faith in Him. Devout Jews do the same today as they attempt to keep the Sabbath by not throwing a light switch. The Sabbath commandment has nothing to do with throwing a light switch or riding in an elevator. The Sabbath commandment has to do with setting apart a day to think about God and to seek His pleasure, not with straining over light switches.

Again, God gave us the new covenant so we might exercise faith toward Himself. And again, we have missed the point entirely. We have adopted a few key verses, such as Romans 10:9,10, and by means of these we hope to avoid the important issues of judgment, mercy, and faith. We have made the same mistake as the Jews—and for the same reason. Our hearts are not right in the sight of God!

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it (Hebrews 4:2).

"Not being mixed with faith"!

The Jews were supposed to mix faith with the gospel of deliverance from Egypt and possession of the land of promise, but they did not do so. They chose instead to follow the letter of the statutes while their hearts were far from God. This was a perennial complaint of the Lord against Israel.

Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked (Deuteronomy 10:16).

And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the Lord your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil (Joel 2:13).

He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to practice righteousness, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? (Micah 6:8).

The difference between the two covenants is not only that one was of the letter and the other is by faith. The main difference is, the old covenant contains a provision for forgiving sin while the new covenant contains both a provision for forgiving sin and also a provision for removing the tendencies of sin. Both covenants require faith on the part of the worshiper, for without faith it never has been possible to please God.

The confusion over the nature of new-covenant grace is an understandable error, given the complexity of the concept, but it has been deadly in its effect. True saints must now throw off the false security given by the teaching of "workless grace" and follow the exhortations to holiness given by the Lord Jesus and the Apostles of the Lamb.

Later passages in Romans, as well as the tenor of Paul’s writings in all of His Epistles, reveal beyond doubt that Paul lived and taught righteousness, and indeed would be appalled were he to see how his exposition of Divine grace has been interpreted by us Gentiles.

Back to Study for the book Romans

Back to Chapter Three...