What does Paul mean by “works”?

Explanation:

We can detect that the phrase because of works should not be restricted to the Mosaic law but refers to any human works whatsoever. We can detect this because Paul specifically writes in Romans 9:11 that though they had done neither good nor bad, God preferred Jacob, not from works, but his own call. By including the point that neither had done any good or bad, Paul makes it clear that there is no work whatsoever that merited or demerited God to choose Jacob. Rather, God chose Jacob but based on his own call.

Counterargument:

It is important to notice that Paul’s wider point in this section is to deal with the problem of Israel.³ Israel received the law, the covenants, the worship, the patriarchs, and from their race was the Christ (Romans 9:4–5), so how can it be that some Israelites will not be justified? It is in this context that we must understand Paul’s point that Jacob was chosen not because of works. In other words, Paul is making the point to a Jewish audience who believed that works of the law would justify them, that God chose Jacob not because of works of the law. Once we notice the wider context, we notice Paul has in mind works of the Mosaic law.

Response to counterargument:

While it might be that Paul addresses his Jewish audience or is grappling with the problem of Israel in this section, this does not imply that works means works of the Mosaic law. For if Paul simply means works as in any work whatsoever, this includes works of the Mosaic law. Of course, as this argument points out, Paul specifically writes in Romans 9:11 that before Jacob had done anything good or bad, that is, any work whatsoever, God chose him, not from works. Given that Paul specifically says Jacob had not done any work whatsoever, and the fact that works of the law are included under any works whatsoever, likely when Paul says Gods chose Jacob not because of works, he has in mind any work whatsoever.

Explanation:

When Paul writes that Jacob was preferred not because of works, we can detect that he means any works whatsoever. That is because the phrase because of works is broad, so it likely includes any works whatsoever. Of course, Paul could have limited the types of works he has in mind by qualifying them as works of the law, but he does not do this. Rather, he simply makes clear that no human activity made Jacob preferable to God, for election is based solely on God’s call.⁴

Counterargument:

We know from Romans 4:1–25 that sometimes Paul refers to works when he has in mind works of the law. For Paul discusses the fact that Abraham was not justified by works (Romans 4:2), before explaining in Romans 4:13–15 that justification came not through the law but through faith, for the law brings wrath. So Paul refers simply to Abraham’s works, and then associates those works with the works of the Mosaic law. This implies that when Paul uses the phrase because of works, although he does not specify it, he may have in mind not any works whatsoever, but the works of the Mosaic law.

Response to counterargument:

This argument overlooks the fact that there was no Mosaic law when Abraham was justified. Still, Paul uses Abraham as an example to the Israelites who do have the law, by explaining that Abraham was not justified by any work whatsoever, which implies that no one will be justified by works of the law. So when Paul says Abraham was not justified by works, he has in mind not the Mosaic law but any work whatsoever. He then uses the example of Abraham to point out that if Abraham could not be justified by any work whatsoever, then works of the Mosaic law do not justify either. Likewise, when Paul says Jacob was preferred not because of works in Romans 9:12, he means no work whatsoever, which implies that no one is preferred by maintaining the Mosaic law.

The only weakness of this view is that works is a somewhat technical term for Paul that sometimes refers to works of the Mosaic law. Given the context, it is plausible that Paul would use this technical term to explain that salvation is based on God’s initiative, not works of the Mosaic law.

Explanation:

We know what Paul means when he writes that God chose Jacob not by works but by his own call, because Paul already used this phrase in Romans 3:20. There he specifically explained that by works of the law, no human would be justified before God, for through the law comes knowledge of sin. Now, when Paul used the phrase works of the law in Romans 3:20 he had in mind the Mosaic law, and he was countering the Jewish idea that by maintaining the Mosaic law, the Jews maintained their relationship with God.⁷ Likely, Paul has the same idea in mind when he writes that God chose Jacob, not from works. That is, he is reiterating the fact that Jacob was preferred, not because he maintained the Mosaic law, but because election is based on God’s call.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that there was no Mosaic law in place when Jacob was conceived. In fact, Paul himself writes elsewhere that the Mosaic law came hundreds of years after the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Galatians 3:17).⁸ This is a problem for this view because if there was no Mosaic law for Jacob to obey, then it does not make sense for Paul to say that God preferred Jacob not because of works of the Mosaic law, because there was no Mosaic law.

Response to counterargument:

Paul in fact closely associates ethnic descent with works of the Mosaic law.⁹ We can detect this by the fact that Paul’s argument in this section begins with the notion that those born of natural descent are not all Abraham’s seed. That is, there is a difference between being of the flesh of Abraham and being a child of the promise. He then expands on what he means by pointing out that God chose Jacob over Esau even though they were both born of the same act of intercourse, qualifying what he means by saying God preferred Jacob not by works. It is important to notice what Paul has done when he writes not by works. First, he says it is not natural descent that makes one a child of the promise, and now he says it is not by works. The point would not have been overlooked by Israelites. For Israelites believed that by natural descent and keeping the Mosaic law they were chosen by God. Paul counters this by making the point that neither natural descent nor keeping the Mosaic law qualifies one to be preferred. Thus, that there was no Mosaic law at the time of Jacob is not to Paul’s point. Rather, Paul’s point is that neither natural descent nor keeping the Mosaic law makes one preferable to God.

Explanation:

When Paul writes that God’s preference for Jacob is not because of works, it is important to understand his fuller argument here. We can detect that Paul has a fuller argument because he opens Romans 9:11 with the term for, which signals that what he is about to write is related to his earlier argument from Romans 4:1–25.¹⁰ There Paul has in mind the problem of Israel. That is, given that Israel was the people of God who received the Mosaic law, shouldn’t salvation be based on works of the Mosaic law? Paul explains in Romans 4:1–25 that in fact Abraham was justified not by works of the law but faith. Paul is extending this line of thought in Romans 9:1–33. For he again asks about Israel’s unique status as God’s people as evidenced by the fact that they received the covenants, the law, the worship, and so on (Romans 9:4–5). Still, Paul explains that Jacob was chosen by God, not because of works but based on his own call. When seen as a fuller expression of Paul’s original argument concerning the problem of Israel, we can detect that because of works likely refers to because of works of the Mosaic law.¹¹

Counterargument:

The phrase works of the law is simply a subset of works. We know this because Paul explained in Romans 1:1–2:29 that while the Israelites have the Mosaic law, the Gentiles have a natural law that also accuses and excuses them. So there is a general law of morality to which the conscience and Mosaic law testify. Further, justification comes through faith in Christ, so no one is justified either by works of conscience or works of the Mosaic law. Thus, while Paul sometimes refers to the works of the Mosaic law, these works are a subset of the wider category works. Now, given that there was no Mosaic law when Jacob and Esau were born, along with the fact that Paul says Jacob was chosen not because of works, Paul likely has in mind the wider sense of any work whatsoever rather than works of the Mosaic law.¹² None of this takes away from Paul’s fuller argument that Israel is not justified by works of the law, for by saying Jacob was preferred, not by works, this applies to all works, including works of the law.

One weakness of this view is that it assumes Paul’s focus in this section is on the fact that the Mosaic law does not save. In fact, Paul’s real focus is not on the fact that the law does not save, but on the fact that salvation is based solely on God’s initiative. That salvation is based solely on God’s initiative makes it more likely that by works Paul has in mind any work whatsoever.