by Harry BuererWe’ve seen in some past posts how Paul viewed God’s law in the book of Acts and how he even went out of his way to provide evidence to quell the rumor that he was teaching people to disregard the law. (Acts 21) But what about his epistles? Do they claim that the law is no longer in effect, as some people think? Let’s look at his epistle to the Romans and see what it says about this topic.
We should first notice that Paul declares the primacy of Jews over Gentiles in the faith of Jesus. He says that the gospel “is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile” (1:16). In chapter three he states that Jews have much advantage over Gentiles because “they have been entrusted with the very words of God” (3:1-2).
Back in chapter two he addresses Jews and their association with the law. He says, “You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?” (2:23) It’s clear that he thinks that Jews who adhere to God and his law should keep it so as not to dishonor God. But should the law be kept by Jews only?
He goes on to say, “If those who are not circumcised (i.e. Gentiles) keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker” (2:26-27). It’s clear that he considers Gentiles keeping the law as a good thing.
Earlier in chapter two he addresses the difference between hearing the law and obeying it. “For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous” (2:13). He doesn’t mean by this that keeping the law brings salvation, as he makes clear in 3:20. But keeping the law is a way of declaring that you are righteous, that you have been saved.
Admittedly he’s talking primarily to Jews at this point and contrasting those who talk about the law with those who actually keep it. But he does go on to include Gentiles in the conversation when he speaks favorably that “Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law… they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” (2:14-15).
What’s this about having the requirements of the law written on the heart? The idea echoes the language of Jeremiah when he announced the coming of the new covenant (for Jews only) with God saying, “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts” (Jeremiah 31:33).
Paul uses slightly different language for the same concept at the end of Romans 2. “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly, and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.” (2:28-29). Circumcision of the heart is something that had been urged since Moses (cp. Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6). And here Paul declares that it’s available to Gentiles as well.
Elsewhere in his epistles Paul talks about believing Gentiles being included in Israel in different terms: being grafted into the olive tree (Romans 11:17-24), becoming one new man, or a building in which God lives (Ephesians 2:11-22). But it’s clear that when Gentiles accept Jesus’ sacrifice and embrace the God and the people of Israel, they are considered to be a part of the greater Israel, due to their heart condition — circumcision of the heart.
Paul summarizes this in chapter 3 when he talks about the mystery that was revealed to him. “This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise of Christ Jesus” (3:6). He goes on to explain how this mystery of Gentile believers becoming one with Israel is to demonstrate the wisdom of God to the entire spiritual world. Praise God for his wisdom!