Introduction: The 4 views on ‘works of the law’
The phrase works of the law in Romans and Galatians is one that matters greatly in theological interpretation. How it is understood often can shape entire theological systems. There are 4 options for the phrase. This essay will identify each of the viewpoints and their major arguments before articulating which viewpoint seems most sound.
Body: Exegetical examination
A. ‘Works of the law’ refers to the civil and Ceremonial law.
This view is one of the oldest views having its roots in the patristic fathers (though it may be easily confused with another view the fathers held). It was also a standard view throughout the Middle Ages and was the traditional view of Arminian Christian theology.
This view understands the phrase not by ‘works of the law’ to be referring to the ceremonial and civil aspects of the law. Thus, one is saved by Jesus and not by the ceremonial works of the law because Jesus was the ‘telos’- (end goal fulfillment) of the law (Rom 10:4) Theologically this means that one is saved by Jesus, not by the sacrifices. It also means that one must be living in obedience as a condition of being saved and thus if one rebels against God they have ‘lost’ or rejected their salvation as keeping the moral law of God is still a requirement to be accepted of God.
B. ‘Works of the law’ means obedience.
This view became very popular around the time of the Reformation and often is identified with the Lutheran view of the Reformation. In this view ‘works of the law’ is identified as obedience to the commandments of Christ. In this view one is saved by one trust in Jesus’s death for one’s sins not by one’s obedience. This view sees the conflict as between faith in Jesus vs Obedience to Jesus with Paul teaching that we are not saved by obedience but by Faith Alone. Theologians like Rudolf Bultman really emphasized that understanding ‘works of the law’ as obedience is ‘works righteousness’ in his view and thus the cardinal error of man -trying to earn one's salvation.
C. The New Perspective:
The New Perspective of more rightly the New PerspectiveS has often been identified with three major Scholars E.P. Sanders, N.T. Wright and James D G Dunn. Each of these scholars hold different and varying view about theology and in particular Pauline theology. However, what they held in common was their reaction starting in the late 1970’s through the 2010’s that the phrase ‘works of the law’ was not talking about obedience. One New Perspective view held by James Dunn and N.T. Wright understands the phrase ‘works of the law’ as referring to the boundary markers which separated Jew and Gentiles. In particular food laws, sabbath and circumcision are generally highlighted. Notably, most of these specifics overlap with the civil and ceremonial laws and thus many times (though not always) the New Perspective comes to similar exegetical conclusions as medieval Christianity though with entirely different exegetical reasoning.
D. ‘Works of the law’ means works of the Torah-the Mosaic Covenant
This viewpoint can be termed the early perspective as it seems to be (according to the evidence given by Matthew Thomas) the predominant view in the earliest days of Christianity. This view understands the contrast to be between old and new covenant. This view understands the ‘law’ that one is not under to be the Mosaic covenant which is done away with Jesus Christ and now one is under the new covenant. Thus, Paul is opposing the Mosaic covenant being the means of salvation because if one can gain salvation through it, then Christ died in vain. Paul therefore articulates that one is saved by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the law. Notable this view is again very similar in results to the New Perspective view and to the Ceremonial view as it also holds that Paul is saying that one does not need to keep the mosaic covenant, but he is not saying that one does not need to obey the commandments of the Christ for heaven.
Conclusion: Suggested result
Douglass Moo in his Romans Commentary, Thomas Schreiner in his Romans Commentary and many others of differing viewpoints have admitted that a primary issue of Paul seems to be the Old Covenant vs the New Covenant. They have rightly noted that the ‘law’ of Christ in the New Testament is something is expected of believers and that Jesus seems to understand believers as living in obedience. Thus ,when looking at three viewpoints which all agree on that and one looks at the patristic fathers and how they understood the passages the conclusion seems clear. There are three different exegetical reasons that all come to the following conclusion: Paul is saying salvation comes through Jesus Christ and that one is no longer to do the Mosaic law but is not removing the expectation of obedience to King Jesus for New Covenant believers. While they all use different exegetical routes to get to this understanding the result is generally the same, and therefore is most likely correct.
Resources Used: Bibliography below.
Harmon, Matthew S. "Paul's" Works of the Law" in the Perspective of Second-Century Reception." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 64, no. 4 (2021): 830-833.
Thomas, Matthew J. Paul's' works of the Law'in the Perspective of Second Century Reception. Vol. 468. Mohr Siebeck, 2018.
Comments