What is meant by being “under the law”?

Explanation:

Paul says that those who are led by the Spirit are not under the law. When Paul says that those who are led by the Spirit are not under the law he means that those led by the Spirit are not subject to the rules of the Mosaic law. We can deduce that Paul means that to be under the law is to be subject to the rules of the Mosaic law because he uses the phrase in Galatians 3:23, Galatians 4:4–5, and Galatians 4:21 to mean the same.⁶ In Galatians 3:23 he says that before faith came, the children of God were held captive by the law until faith was revealed. Thus, before faith came, the children of God were subject to the Mosaic law.

In order to redeem those under the law, Jesus was born under the law (Galatians 4:4–5). In other words, in order to redeem those who are subject to the rules of the Mosaic law, Jesus himself was also subject to that law.

Finally, in Galatians 4:21 Paul asks whether those who desire to be under the law hear what the law says. That is to say, the Judaizers in Galatia are urging the Gentiles to subject themselves to the Mosaic law. Paul reminds them that if they want to live under the law, they commit themselves to the whole Mosaic law (Galatians 5:3), and to commit to the whole law is to be under a curse, because no one can keep the whole Mosaic law (Galatians 3:10).

Counterargument:

It might be that when Paul uses the phrase under the law throughout Galatians he often means something like the rules of the Mosaic law. Still, given the context of Galatians 5:18, this is likely not Paul’s meaning. That is because it is hard to see how someone who is led by the Spirit is not subject to the rules of the Mosaic law. We know from Matthew 5:17 that Jesus did not come to abolish but to fulfill the law, and in Romans 7:12 Paul says that the law is holy, righteous, and good. If Jesus did not come to abolish the law, and the Mosaic law is holy, righteous, and good, then how can it be that those led by the Spirit of God are not subject to the Mosaic law?

Response to counterargument:

When Paul says those led by the Spirit are no longer subject to the rules and regulations of the Mosaic law, he does not mean that those under the Spirit can live any way they like.⁷ What Paul does here is contrast two guiding principles for living a life that is pleasing to God. One guiding principle is to subject yourself to the authority of the Mosaic law. To be subjected to the authority of the law is to commit yourself to upholding all of the commands of the Mosaic law (Galatians 3:10). The commitment involves upholding the law and being subject to the judgment of the law. The judgment of the law has to do with the fact that if you rely on the authority of the law as your principle for living a righteous life, you must uphold the entire law or fall under a curse (Galatians 3:10).

Of course, the problem with committing yourself to the authority of the Mosaic law as a principle for righteous living is that humans are sinful, which means that we cannot uphold all of the rules and regulations of the Mosaic law. And since one cannot uphold the rules and regulations of the law, those under the law are under a curse.

On the other hand, the Spirit is more than a set of regulations but God’s creative power working in the believer. The problem is not the law, for we know that the law is holy, righteous, and good, but the problem is that humans are sinful. That is why life under the Spirit is superior to life under the law. The Spirit of God does not simply give us a list of regulations, but recreates and cleanses our sinful human spirit, enabling us, in some small measure to live according to God’s will. Of course, God’s will is not contrary to the Mosaic law, so one who lives according to the Spirit lives according to at least some elements of the Mosaic law. Still, the nuance in Paul’s thinking here is that there is a difference between subjecting oneself to the principle of the law and to the Spirit.

Explanation:

We can deduce what Paul means when he refers to being under the law by looking at passages where he mentions aspects of the law. For example, in Galatians 2:12–16 Paul explains that the Jewish Christians separated themselves from the Gentiles, as an act of obedience to the Mosaic law. Also, in Galatians 5:2–3 Paul explains that if the Galatians get circumcised, they are subject to the whole law. These two mentions of the law show that the law Paul has in mind is the Mosaic law. One aspect of the Mosaic law was to keep oneself separate from the impurity of the nations. Another was to mark oneself as God’s child through circumcision. To disassociate with the Gentiles and mark oneself with circumcision were aspects of the old covenant as enshrined in the Mosaic law. Of course, there was more to the law than separation from the Gentiles and circumcision, so Paul uses the short form under the law to capture the notion of the whole Mosaic law.

Counterargument:

It is hard to see how being led by the Spirit could free one from the whole Mosaic law. The law included things like separation from the Gentiles and circumcision, but it also included the command not to steal, murder, or commit adultery. Thus, it is hard to see why one who is led by the Spirit is no longer under the command not to steal. More likely, when Paul uses the phrase under the law he has a narrower sense in mind, referring only to the ceremonial aspects of the law.

Response to counterargument:

Clarification is in order. When Paul refers to the law he has the whole Mosaic law in mind. When he refers to being under the law he has in mind the whole Mosaic law as it operated in the relationship between God and Israel. Before Christ, God used the whole Mosaic law to confine Israel. In Romans 7:1–25, Paul expands on this notion by explaining that the law exposed sin as sin (Romans 7:7). He says that without the law he would not have known what it means to covet (Romans 7:7–8), but through the commandment, sin produced all kinds of covetousness. Paul is careful to point out that the law itself is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), but the law exposed the fact that human nature is sinful and corrupt. So, to be under the whole Mosaic law is to be governed by a law that exposes one as sinful, without a means to escape one’s sin. This is why the law brings a curse (Galatians 3:10). On the other hand, in the new covenant era God relates to his people through faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit. Paul explains that one who is led by the Spirit is not under the law. In other words, one who is led by the Spirit is not simply exposed as a sinner by the whole Mosaic law but is enabled to live a new life by the power of the Spirit.

The problem with this view is that it dies the death of a thousand qualifications. First, the argument is that to be under the law is to be under the rules and regulations of the whole Mosaic law. Once it is shown that since the law reflects the will of God, it cannot be opposed to the Spirit, one has to qualify that under the law does not mean the rules and regulations of the whole Mosaic law, but being under a law that cannot make anyone righteous. In other words, the counterarguments expose the fact that when Paul uses the phrase under the law he seems to have more nuance in mind than simply the whole Mosaic law.

Explanation:

When Paul says those under the Spirit are not under the law we have to understand him in the immediate context. First, he explains that those who walk by the Spirit will not satisfy the desires of the flesh (Galatians 5:16). Next he explains that the Spirit and the desires of the flesh are opposed (Galatians 5:17). Finally, he concludes that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not x (Galatians 5:18). Based on what he has said previously, we fully expect x to be something to do with the flesh. For example, we could imagine Paul saying, If you are led by the Spirit, you are not in the flesh. What he writes instead is that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Given how Paul has contrasted the Spirit with the flesh in Galatians 5:16–17, we should understand him to take flesh and under the law as interchangeable. Thus, what he means by under the law is the realm of the flesh.¹⁰ And to be in the realm of the flesh is to be under the dominion of sin.¹¹

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this argument. First, when Paul uses the phrase under the law in Galatians 3:23 he clearly has the Mosaic law in mind. We can deduce this because in Galatians 3:19 he begins to explain the origins of the Mosaic law before noting that before faith came the Israelites were confirmed under the law. It is hard to see how Paul could have anything other than the Mosaic law in mind in Galatians 3:23. Second, Paul says that God sent forth his Son, that is, Jesus Christ, who was born under the law. Since Jesus never sinned, we cannot say that he was born in the realm of the flesh and therefore under the dominion of sin.

Response to counterargument:

While Paul uses the phrase under the law in several passages, we have to deduce his particular meaning based on the immediate context. As Paul contrasts the Spirit with the flesh multiple times in Galatians 5:16–17 before concluding that if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the law, we can see that there is a strong correlation between the desires of the flesh and being under the law. At the same time it is absurd to suggest that Jesus Christ was under the dominion of sin. One way to resolve the tension is to see that there is some nuance in the phrase under the law. Paul said previously that the law was added because of transgressions, and it confined the Israelites. Another way to say it is that because the Israelites lived according to the flesh, God gave them the Mosaic law to expose their sin and confine them. Now Paul explains that those who walk by the Spirit are no longer under the confinement of the law, because the law only confines those who live by the desires of the flesh. Thus, in Galatians 5:18, under the law refers to the fact that the law confines those who live according to the flesh. So it does not refer to the Mosaic law without qualification, or the realm of the flesh; rather, it is used to indicate that those who live by the Spirit are not confined by the law.

Explanation:

Paul says that if one is led by the Spirit one is no longer under the law. He then lists the pattern of living of a person who lives by the flesh (Galatians 5:19–21) and one who lives by the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–26). This indicates that being under the law has to do with living by the flesh or being under the dominion of sin. Paul makes a similar comparison of being under the law and being under the dominion of sin in Romans 6:14.¹² There he says that sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. Thus, we can see that for Paul, to be under the law is to live by the flesh, captive by the dominion of sin.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that Romans 6:14 does not necessarily imply that to be under the law is to be under the dominion of sin. Rather, Romans 6:14 has to do with the fact that God now relates to his people through grace and not the law. We know from Galatians 3:19–23 that the law was added because of transgression and acted as a custodian until the time of Christ. The problem is that the law was not able to make anyone righteous (Galatians 3:21), so that without the Spirit of God the law simply exposed one’s sin but could not free anyone from the dominion of sin. Thus, the reason sin will no longer have dominion is that God no longer manages his relationship with us through a law that cannot make anyone righteous. Rather, he manages his relationship with us by the Spirit. The Spirit works in our lives to produce fruits of righteousness (Galatians 5:22–26), while the law simply exposes sin as sin.

The problem with this view is that we know that the law is good and holy because it reflects the will of God (Romans 7:11–14). So it is hard to see how being under the dominion of sin and being under the law could be synonyms. Of course, human nature is sinful, and the law is not able to change human nature, so there is a correlation between being under the dominion of sin and being under the law. Still, we want to be careful not to blur the distinction between the sinful nature and the perfect law of God.