How did the Apostle Paul see the law
 |
| (this image file is erroneously named) The Visionary Ezekiel Temple plan drawn by the 19th century French architect and Bible scholar Charles Chipiez. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
In its Old Testament context the verse reads, “You shall therefore keep my statutes and my rules; if a person does them, he shall live by them: I am the LORD” (Lev. 18:5). We should observe that the verse is addressed to those who belong to the Lord. Israel has been redeemed from Egypt and liberated by God’s grace. Therefore, in context the verse should not be construed as legalistic or as offering salvation on the basis of works. Israel’s obedience is a response to God’s gracious intervention on their behalf. What is the nature of the life promised in Leviticus 18:5? Moses is almost certainly speaking of life in the land, for the laws were given to the Israelites so that they would not follow the practices of the Canaanites and be expelled from the land (cf. Lev. 18:3, 24–28). If we consider the narrative of the remainder of the Old Testament, this interpretation fits nicely. Israel was sent into exile because of her failure to do the Lord’s will. They were “vomited” out of the land because of their disobedience (Lev. 18:28).
It is instructive to see where Leviticus 18:5 is cited in the remainder of the Old Testament. Ezekiel picks up the words of Leviticus 18:5 in chapter 20, as he rehearses the history of Israel. He emphasizes the grace of God to the generation delivered from Egypt (Ezek. 20:6–11). Even though they were rebellious and turned to what is detestable, the Lord acted for his name’s sake (v. 9) and liberated them from Egypt. He then gave them his “rules, by which, if a person does them, he shall live” (v. 11). We see again that the law was given in a covenantal context, after God had saved his people from Egypt.
Nevertheless, Ezekiel immediately turns to the rebellion of Israel. They “rejected my rules, by which, if a person does them, he shall live” (v. 13). In context it is clear that Ezekiel addresses the wilderness generation, and so he has in mind the sin with the golden calf and the many other sins that characterized the wilderness generation. Nevertheless, the Lord did not completely wipe out Israel for his name’s sake (vv. 14–17), though he punished the wilderness generation by not allowing them to enter the Land of Promise.
Ezekiel thus far has repeated twice that those who keep his laws will live (Ezek. 20:11, 13), suggesting that Israel was not able to keep God’s commands. Such a reading is confirmed as the narrative continues. Ezekiel reiterates a third time the words of Leviticus 18:5. The children of the wilderness generation were disobedient to the law that promised life if kept (Ezek. 20:21). Again, the Lord had mercy in not destroying them altogether, though he threatened exile if their disobedience continued (Ezek. 20:22–24). The reference to exile confirms the interpretation suggested for Leviticus 18:5. Failure to keep the law would result in Israel’s expulsion from the land.
Ezekiel concludes his reuse of Leviticus 18:5 with a remarkable statement: “Moreover, I gave them statutes that were not good and rules by which they could not have life” (Ezek. 20:25). Ezekiel does not mean that the content of the law is not good. His point is that the law was not good for Israel since Israel was unable to obey it and to gain life. If Israel had turned from wickedness and pursued goodness, she would find life, as Ezekiel 18 repeatedly emphasizes (Ezek. 18:9, 13, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 32).2 But Israel’s consistent unwillingness to do what the Lord commands reveals a problem with her heart that can be remedied only by the grace of God. Israel’s only hope is the promise of the indwelling Spirit, which will enable them to keep God’s commands (Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:26–27). Ezekiel 20, then, confirms the words of Leviticus 18:5. Since Israel was unable to keep God’s law, she was being sent into exile.
Nehemiah rehearses Israel’s history in Nehemiah 9, remembering how the creator God chose Abraham and promised to give him the land (vv. 6–8), and how he delivered Israel from Egypt and sustained them in the wilderness (vv. 9–15). He comments that the law given on Sinai contains “right rules and true laws, good statutes and commandments” (v. 13). Remarkably, Israel rebelled in the wilderness by desiring to return to Egypt and by making a golden calf (vv. 16–18). Still, the Lord showered his mercy on them, for he preserved them in the wilderness (vv. 19–21) and led them graciously into the Promised Land (vv. 22–25). Still, Israel continued to rebel in the land in the days of the judges (vv. 26–28).
The Lord handed them over to their enemies when “they cast your law behind their back” (v. 26) and delivered them when they cried out for mercy.
The allusion to Leviticus 18:5 occurs in Nehemiah 9:29, which recalls the repeated warnings to Israel: “You [the Lord] warned them in order to turn them back to your law. Yet they acted presumptuously and did not obey your commandments, but sinned against your rules, which if a person does them, he shall live by them.” What Nehemiah emphasizes in citing Leviticus 18:5 is Israel’s failure to keep God’s law, and hence they were sent into exile (Neh. 9:30). I conclude, then, that Nehemiah’s use of Leviticus 18:5 fits with the meaning of the verse as it was originally given in Leviticus.
The references to Leviticus 18:5 in the Old Testament are instructive, for they call attention to Israel’s failure to keep the law, even suggesting a moral inability to do what pleases God. The life in view relates to life in the land, and yet there is a suggestion as well that Israel’s failure to obey indicates that they do not truly know God. They need the Holy Spirit and the new covenant to do the will of God (Ezek. 36:26–27; Jer. 31:31–34). Israel’s constant rebellion and failure to keep the law led to their being sent into exile, as both Ezekiel and Nehemiah attest in citing Leviticus 18:5.
Some Jewish traditions in the period subsequent to the New Testament understood Leviticus 18:5 as promising eternal life to those who keep the law: “And you shall keep my statutes and my judgments, which if a man do he shall live by them an everlasting life” (Tg. Onq.) “And you shall keep my statutes, and the order of my judgments, which if a man do he shall live in them, in the life of eternity, and his position shall be with the just” (Tg. Ps-J.).
In a thorough study of Leviticus 18:5 in the Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism, Preston Sprinkle shows that in some texts the verse is interpreted as requiring obedience for eternal life (cf. CD III, 15–16; 4Q266 11, I–II, 12; Pss. Sol. 14:1–5; cf. also 4Q504; Philo, Prelim. Studies 86–87). Simon Gathercole also argues that an eschatological reading of Leviticus 18:5 is evident both in the New Testament and in Second Temple Judaism. He rightly remarks, “There is an ‘eternalization’ of the life that, in its original context in Leviticus, would have been understood in terms of lengthened life and prosperity of one’s descendents and the nation as a whole.”
The interpretation in Second Temple Judaism is helpful for understanding Paul, for Paul clearly has eternal life in view and not just life in the land. Hence, he understands what is promised in Leviticus 18:5 typologically. As is often the case in the New Testament, the land promises become a type of life to come. In Galatians 3:12 Paul opposes any sort of combination of law and gospel, as if one were saved both by doing the law and believing in the gospel. Life is obtained only via the latter, and not by the former, for no one is able to keep what the law demands (Gal. 3:10). We also must interpret what Paul says in terms of redemptive history. Now that Christ has come, forgiveness is granted only through his atoning sacrifice, and hence there is no room for forgiveness via the law. Other scholars have argued that the verse refers to Christ’s obedience, but it is doubtful that Christ is in mind here.
Some argue that Paul corrects a misinterpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in both Galatians 3:12 and Romans 10:5, just as the rabbis often responded to a misinterpretation of one verse by citing others.7 But the misinterpretation view suffers from a major defect. Elsewhere Paul always cites an Old Testament text positively to advance his own argument, and we are lacking any clear evidence that he responds to a wrong understanding here. It is most likely, then, that Paul cites the Old Testament to advance his argument.
Paul reads Leviticus 18:5 redemptive-historically. Perfect obedience is demanded from those who place themselves under the law, for the atonement provided by Old Testament sacrifices no longer avails with the coming of Christ. Perfect obedience was not demanded in one sense under the Sinai covenant, for the law provided forgiveness via sacrifices for those who transgressed.9 In Paul’s view, however (see Gal. 3:15–4:7), the Sinai covenant is no longer in force. Hence, those who observe circumcision and the law to obtain justification (Gal. 5:2–4) are turning back the clock in salvation history. The coming of Christ spells the end of the Sinai covenant (Gal. 3:15–4:7). Hence, those who live under the law must keep it perfectly to be saved, for in returning to the law they are forsaking the atonement provided by Christ (Gal. 2:21; 5:3). Returning to the law is futile, however, for the sacrifices of atonement under the Sinai covenant pointed ahead to the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore animal sacrifices no longer provide forgiveness now that the definitive sacrifice of Christ has been offered (Gal. 3:13).
Some scholars have read the relationship between Romans 10:5 and 10:6–8 as if both describe the life of faith. On this reading, the citation of Leviticus 18:5 in Romans 10:5 positively portrays the life of believers.10 Hence, those who trust in God (Rom. 10:6–8) keep the law (Rom. 10:5). This interpretation should be rejected for the following reasons. First, it is unlikely that Paul would use the same verse (Lev. 18:5) negatively in Galatians 3:12 but positively in Romans 10:5, especially when we consider that the subject is the same in both contexts (righteousness of law versus righteousness of faith).
Second, it seems impossible that Paul would speak positively of righteousness coming from the law (Rom. 10:5). Righteousness in Paul is invariably by faith, or through Christ, but never from the law. The parallel in Philippians 3 confirms this reading. Paul repudiates his own righteousness “that comes from the law” and rests entirely on the righteousness that is his through faith in Christ. Third, this fits with what we see regularly in Paul’s theology, as this book elsewhere documents, where faith in Christ is contrasted with “doing” as the pathway to a right relationship with God. Fourth, the interpretation defended here fits with the context of Romans 9:30–10:4. Israel did not attain righteousness by pursuing it through the law since Israel attempted to establish her righteousness by works (Rom. 9:31–32). They did not know about God’s righteousness and attempted “to establish their own” through their obedience to the law (Rom. 10:3–4).
SUMMARY
Leviticus 18:5 in its Old Testament context requires obedience out of gratefulness to the Lord for delivering his people from Egypt. If Israel obeyed, they would remain in the land, but disobedience would lead to exile. Both Ezekiel and Nehemiah cite Leviticus 18:5 to remind Israel that their exile was due to their disobedience. Hence, it was clear from the Old Testament story that Israel was unable to observe the law. Some sectors of Second Temple Judaism picked up Leviticus 18:5 and understood it in terms of eternal life. Paul follows this pattern, using the text typologically and contrasting life via the law to life via faith. Clearly, Paul believes that obtaining life by means of the law is impossible due to human disobedience. Eternal life is obtained only by faith, as believers trust in Christ’s atoning sacrifice.
Schreiner, T. R. (2010). 40 Questions about Christians and Biblical Law. (B. L. Merkle, Ed.) (pp. 59–63). Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional.
