I AM Bible Studies and Resources

Works of The Law

The following passage may seem clear enough:

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse. For it is written, "Cursed is everyone who doesn't continue in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them."
11 Now that no man is justified by the law before God is evident, for, "The righteous will live by faith."
12 The law is not of faith, but, "He that does them will live in them."
13 Messiah redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree;"
14 that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Messiah Yeshua; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Gal. 3:10-14

However the proponents of Torah Observance would say that the 'works of The Law' is actually legalism - that Paul does not have Torah [The Law] in view but a legalistic perversion of it. So, in the Jewish New Testament, verse 12 is translated:

Furthermore, legalism is not based on trusting and being faithful, but on a misuse of the text that says, "Anyone who does these things will attain life through them."
Gal. 3:12 (JNT)

The word nomos (with the article) instead of being rendered The Law [Torah] has instead been stripped of it's obvious meaning and the word 'legalism' substituted, which then takes away from the thrust of what Paul is saying. According to David H. Stern, the word nomos can mean, not only God's Torah but a legalistic perversion of it:
"One of the best kept secrets about the New Testament is that when Sha'ul writes"nomos" he frequently does not mean "law" but "legalism."" (Jewish New Testament Commentary - David H. Stern, p. 536).
He tries to prove this by associating erga nomou with nomos and thereby giving a new meaning to nomos itself - something which cannot be found in any Greek dictionary or lexicon.
Commentating on Gal. 2:19 he refers his reader back to his commentary on Gal. 2:16b:
""Erga nomou," therefore, is a technical term coined by Sha'ul .....; it speaks of legalism, not Law." (Jewish New Testament Commentary - David H. Stern, p. 537; see also p. 545, on Gal. 3:10-14; pp. 535-538, on Gal. 2:16b and also p. 542, on Gal. 2:19):

For it was through letting the Torah speak for itself that I died to its traditional legalistic misinterpretation, so that I might live in direct relationship with God.
Gal. 2:19 (JNT)

"...even so, we have come to realize that a person is not declared righteous by God on the ground of his legalistic observance of Torah commands, but through the Messiah Yeshua's trusting faithfulness. Therefore, we too have put our trust in Messiah Yeshua and become faithful to him, in order that we might be declared righteous on the ground of the Messiah's trusting faithfulness and not on the ground of our legalistic observance of Torah commands. For on the ground of legalistic observance of Torah commands, no one will be declared righteous."
Gal. 2:16 (JNT)

David H. Stern, in trying to show that 'works of The Law' means 'legalistic observation of The Law', renders those passages (especially in Galatians) where 'erga nomou' appears, incorrectly as Paul was writing to Gentile Christians who had little or no understanding of the complexities of Jewish Law and customs. They certainly would not have grasped the intricacies of David H. Stern's assertion of 'erga nomou' meaning 'legalism'; Paul would of , by necessity, had to explain quite clearly in order for his Gentile readers to understand if it was something other than simply 'works of The Law'.
As an example:

2 "I think myself happy, King Agrippa, that I am to make my defense before you this day concerning all the things whereof I am accused by the Jews,
3 especially because you are expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews. Therefore I beg you to hear me patiently...."
Acts 26:2-3

To King Agrippa, Paul had no need to explain things pertaining to The Law; but to Gentiles, that might be familiar with Jewish customs (cf. Ac. 15:21) - which is not the same as being 'expert', he would most certainly have to.
Paul's "coined phrase" would certainly need an explanation as it would be impossible for his readers to know what was on his mind. To assume that somebody other than the author of a newly coined phrase, and a technical one at that, would understand the meaning and import of it, without explanation on the said authors part, is completely unbelievable. Therefore, for David H. Stern to insist that the Gentile Christians in Galatia had enough of a grasp of Jewish theology to immediately understand, without any explanation, that erga nomou in v. 16 and consequently the two differing meanings of the word nomos (the first meaning law in the normal sense but the second legalism) in v. 19 are to be understood as a legalistic perversion of The Law [Torah] is to try to get the reader to believe something that Paul never intended.
It is then obvious that no more than the plain meaning of the text is what Paul wanted his recipients to grasp - that:

For I, through the law, died to the law, that I might live to God.
Gal. 2:19

The analogy of death is brought out in Rom. 7:1-6:

1 Or are you ignorant, brothers (for I speak to men who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man for as long as he lives?
2 For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband.
3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.
4 Therefore, my brothers, you also were made dead to the law through the body of Messiah, that you would be joined to another, to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit to God.
5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were through the law, worked in our members to bring forth fruit to death.
6 But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that in which we were held; so that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.
Rom. 7:1-6

From this passage it is very clear that through the body of Messiah all believers in Yeshua have died to law (Paul is speaking about The Law but the analogy covers all law) in order to live to another - namely Messiah. By saying this it really puts the nail in the coffin (no pun intended) of those that insist that The Law, in one form or another, is still in effect today.
So, contrary to what David H. Stern, and similar proponents may say, the New Testament teaches very clearly that Yeshua has fulfilled The Law in such a way that no-one need any longer be obligated to it: That Yeshua, by His sacrificial death and His bodily resurrection has inaugurated the New Covenant promised in the Old Testament. This New Covenant is by grace through faith in Messiah's finished work on the cross.

Difficult Passages:

There are a few passages that are worth looking at which might be thought of as problematic:

1. Yirmeyahu / Jeremiah 31:33 and Yechezkel / Ezekiel 36:27-28

But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says theLORD: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:
Yirmeyahu / Jeremiah 31:33

27 I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my ordinances, and do them.
28 You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.
Yechezkel / Ezekiel 36:27-28

The Hebrew word 'torahti', lit. my torah, is not restricted to the common rendering of 'The Torah'. The root word 'torah' means (according to Vines): ""law; direction; instruction." This noun occurs 220 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. In the wisdom literature, where the noun does not appear with a definite article, torah signifies primarily "direction, teaching, instruction":...".
Since, in the above passage, 'torahti' does not appear with the article, then God's laws in general are in view rather than The Law; after all God gave laws before He gave The Law.
Similarly 'My statutes' and 'My judgements' are not restricted to the 613 commandments of The Law but can encompass all of God's statutes, judgements, enactments and laws.
So the two above passages do not require that The Law be put in our hearts but rather God's law which includes all that is representative of His holiness and righteousness.

2. Matthew 5:17-18

17 Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill.
18 For most assuredly, I tell you, until Heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished.
Mt. 5:17-18

Yeshua, under The Law and speaking to people under The Law, said that He had come to fulfill The Law. By His death and resurrection The Law has been fulfilled.
Admittedly there are still elements contained within the Feasts that have yet to be fulfilled but since they refer to Him it follows that only He can fulfill them; therefore since they have no claim on anyone else it follows that as far as mankind is concerned The Law's requirements have all been fulfilled.

3. Acts 15:1-31 (20-21)

20 "...but that we write to them that they abstain from the pollution of idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses from generations of old has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
Acts 15:20-21

Some have claimed that the elders in Jerusalem are implying that the Gentile believers will gradually attend synagogue and take The [transformed?] Law upon themselves.
The actual reason for them writing that Gentile believers should abstain from these four is that since 'every city' was familiar with Jewish customs then the Gentile believers, in order to have any contact with anyone from the Jewish community would necessarily have to keep 'kosher'. No self respecting Jew would enter a Gentile's house let alone eat with him:

He said to them, "You yourselves know how it is an unlawful thing for a man who is a Jew to join himself or come to one of another nation, but God has shown me that I shouldn't call any man unholy or unclean...."
Ac. 10:28

4. Acts 21:20

They, when they heard it, glorified God. They said to him, "You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law...."
Ac. 21:20

Just because it is stated that they were 'zealous for the law' doesn't mean that they were theologically correct, in much the same way that the Bible records that David commanded that Uriah was to fall in battle; obviously the Bible doesn't teach us to plan peoples 'accidental' deaths. Therefore Ac. 21:20 is a statement rather than a teaching of doctrine.

5. 1 Cor. 7:19

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
1 Cor. 7:19

The commandments of God are just that: Everything that God has commanded us in the light of the New Covenant. Notice it says the commandments of God and not the commandments as given through Moses. Neither Moses, the Ten Commandments nor The Law [Torah] are mentioned nor even hinted at; that is because we are to keep God's commandments which, according to the New Testament are:

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, just like I have loved you; that you also love one another.
Jn. 13:34

But to the married I command, not I, but the Lord, that the wife not leave her husband
1 Cor. 7:10

1 Finally then, brothers, we beg and exhort you in the Lord Yeshua, that, as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, even as you do walk, --that you abound more and more.
2 For you know what charge we gave you through the Lord Yeshua.
3 For this is the will of God: your sanctification, that you abstain from sexual immorality,
4 that each one of you know how to possess himself of his own vessel in sanctification and honor,
5 not in the passion of lust, even as the Gentiles who don't know God;
6 that no one should take advantage of and wrong a brother or sister in this matter; because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as also we forewarned you and testified.
7 For God called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification.
1 Thess. 4:1-7

Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother who walks in rebellion, and not after the tradition which they received from us..
2 Thess. 3:6

This is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son, Yeshua the Messiah, and love one another, even as he commanded.
1 Jn. 3:23

The above verses are a summary of the commandments that, under the New Covenant, God would have us keep.

Since The Law cannot be changed (as in altered) and God had promised a new covenant (Yirmeyahu / Jeremiah 31:31-34) then it must follow that the old has to be finished (or ended) in order for the new to be inaugurated; and this is precisely what Yeshua did at the last supper:

He took the cup in like manner after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, that which is poured out for you...."
Lk. 22:20

To reiterate: The Law cannot be transformed, added to nor subtracted from.