THE LAW IS SPIRITUAL
Obert Henderson

“For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin” (Rom. 7:14). In spite of the very clear statement of Paul that “the law is spiritual”. I have on several occasions heard preachers and Bible class teachers say that it is not. This immediately poses a question. Why do the statements of men about the law conflict with the statement of the scripture about it?

We, of the Church of Christ, quite often talk about the book of Romans being very difficult to understand. And there isn’t any question that we generally find it so. But what is the source of this difficulty? Does it stem from the nature of the book, or from some other reason? It seems that it really arises from another cause, and that cause is that we hold a doctrinal position which conflicts with the major argument which Paul makes in the book. The concept of the nature of Christianity which we generally hold prevents an understanding of the theme of Romans.

The major argument of the epistle is that salvation is not by law, but by grace. A recognition of the fundamental difference between these two ideas is essential if one is to grasp the significance of the argument. Conceiving of Christianity as a legal system and salvation as a result of law keeping makes the book utterly incomprehensible. As a result, our attempts to harmonize it with our theology often are bewildering to the observer and frustrating to ourselves.

The passage cited above provides us with a very good example of our inability to comprehend the meaning of the epistle. The scriptures say, “the law is spiritual.” We generally say it is not. For instance, about a year ago, I sat, as a visitor of the congregation, in a Bible class that was studying the seventh chapter of Romans. Within five minutes after verse 14 was read, the teacher made the statement, “The law was not spiritual.”

In some instances our doctrinal views are not in harmony with the scriptures, and we seem to prefer our views to the scripture. By and large, we cannot agree that the law is spiritual and maintain our theological view of the nature of Christianity at the same time. So, we deny that it is spiritual. Let me explain.

We generally conceive of the gospel as a legal system, and hold salvation to be the result of keeping a legal code. In fact, we often use the term, “the new law”, to refer to the gospel. Then to compound the confusion, we classify all the New Testament writings as “gospel.” The law of Moses was a legal system. Since we conceive of Christianity as a legal system also, we must distinguish between the two on some grounds. So, the distinction we usually make in our theology is that the “new law” is spiritual, while the “old law” was not spiritual. If we admit that the law (that is, the law of Moses, the “old law” as we call it) is spiritual, then our explanation of the difference between it and Christianity is lost. So, in spite of the fact that Paul says that “the law is spiritual,” we say that it is not! The distinction we make flies right in the face of the scripture. It strikes me that there must be something wrong with a doctrinal system when it causes one to deny a very plain scriptural statement.

Another question forces itself upon us. What do we mean when we distinguish between the law of Moses and the “new law” by saying one is spiritual while the other is not. From discussing the matter with various brethren in the Church of Christ it appears that the distinction has to do with the clarity versus the ambiguity of the two. The idea seems to be that since the “new law” is rather difficult, and must be ferreted out through the use of various hermeneutical tools, this somehow makes it superior and spiritual.

The law of Moses was very clear, plain and direct. Its requirements were unambiguously stated. For instance, the law told them exactly how to make the tabernacle (Exodus 25-27). Or it told them exactly how the priests were to be consecrated (Exodus 8). Or it told them exactly when and how to make the atonement (Exodus 16:29-34). Or exactly when and how to keep various feasts (Leviticus 24). To understand these did not require any science of hermeneutics, or application of any system of reasoning or logic. It was simple, straight-forward, direct.

But, it is said, the “new law” is different. Instead of any particular law in it being clearly set forth in plain language, (for instance; the “law of worship”) various parts of this “law” are scattered throughout the New Testament writings. Further, these “laws” are generally not explicit, but only implied. Being thus scattered and hidden, these “laws” must then be “dug out” by learning and applying various rules of interpretation, which incidentally, are nowhere mentioned in the scriptures. For instance, we are told, we must have rules to tell when an example is binding and when it is not, when an inference is necessary and thus conclusions based on it binding, and so on. In the terms employed in a book rather popular among one party within the Church of Christ, we must apply these criteria: “generic and specific authority”, “the rule of uniformity”, “the rule of unity”, “the rule of universal application”, “the law of materiality”, “the law of competence”, “the law of limited application”, and “the law of exclusion.” Somehow, when we apply all of these and then arrive at “the law of worship” (or “the law of giving” or the “law of church organization” and so on), these “laws” are spiritual and so much better than the law of Moses.

The fact that “the law” concerning any aspect of Christian living is thus hidden, and has to be ferreted out by such a system of logic, or rather a polyglot system, is supposed to impart a superior character to this “law”. The conclusion then is that this “new law” is spiritual, while the law of Moses was not. And this becomes the essential difference between the law of Moses and the Christian system, in our theological view of the matter. Instead of Christ redeeming us from the law, and setting us free from a system of legal demands (Col. 2:14-16), we conceive of his binding on us a harder, more stringent and much more difficult legal system!

But, what do the scriptures say? “The law is spiritual.” Then what is the difference between the Jewish system and the Christian system? The difference is plainly stated in the book of Romans. It is this. Judaism was a system of law; Christianity one of grace. Under law, all the world became guilty before God, therefore law could not justify; now, the righteousness of God without law is manifested, salvation is by grace, with the result that a man is justified by faith without deeds of law (Rom. 3:20-28). John expresses this distinction like this: “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” Jno. 1:17).

The nature of salvation by law is this: “The man that doeth them shall live in them” (Gal. 3:12b). No flesh can be justified by works of law, since law results in sin (Rom. 3:19-20; Gal. 2 :16). If righteousness comes through law, then Christ died in vain (Gal. 2:21).

On the other hand, the nature of salvation under Christ is this: “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace” (Rom. 4:16a). The righteousness of God which is by faith, and justification freely through grace have now been manifested through Jesus (Rom. 3:21-24).

We make a fundamental error when we conceive of Christianity as being a legal system wherein one has eternal life because he “keeps law”. This error prevents a grasp of the theme of the book of Romans and results in such denials of plain statements as the one which says “the law was not spiritual.”

We must recognize that the difference between Judaism and Christianity is not that the first was an unspiritual legal system while the second is a spiritual legal system. Rather, the difference is that the first was a spiritual legal system, while the second is a spiritual system of grace! In a legal system alone, salvation would be conditioned on keeping every law perfectly, without one mistake, without a single error, with perfect understanding. In a system of grace, salvation is conditioned on Christ bearing our sins for us, and our receiving him by faith (Rom. 3:25-26). When we grasp the difference between a legal system and a grace system, then we can admit that the law of Moses was spiritual, and we can understand the argument that Paul makes in the book of Romans. — 3117 Sheridan, Loveland, Colo.