What does Paul mean by “apart from the law”?

Explanation:

In Romans 3:20 Paul explains that no one will be justified by the works of the law. What he means is that no one will be justified before God by maintaining the Mosaic law perfectly, because all are under sin, so it is not possible to maintain the Mosaic law. Now Paul says that the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law. Given that Paul just referred to the law in Romans 3:20, he likely has the same meaning for law in mind in Romans 3:21. And in Romans 3:20 his reference to the law has to do with keeping the Mosaic law, so he must have the same idea in mind here. Thus, Paul is saying that God’s saving righteousness is revealed apart from having to keep the Mosaic law perfectly.⁴

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it is not obvious that when Paul refers to the works of the law in Romans 3:20, he has in mind obeying the Mosaic law perfectly. Rather, he may have in mind that the works of the law represent the markers that identify Jews. These markers include circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, and dietary restrictions. Thus, Paul says in Romans 3:20 that no one will be justified by maintaining the boundary markers of circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, and obeying food laws.⁵ Now he says in Romans 3:21 that God’s righteousness has been revealed apart from the boundary markers. That is, while the boundary markers used to establish the covenant, they do so no longer.⁶ Instead, the covenant is established by the gospel.

Response to counterargument:

The problem with this counterargument is that it is unlikely that when Paul refers to the works of the law in Romans 3:20, he has in mind Jewish boundary markers. There are several reasons for this, but one reason is that Paul says at the end of Romans 3:20 that through the law comes knowledge of sin. What could it possibly mean for the law to bring knowledge of sin, if the law has to do with boundary markers that establish the covenant? God is the one who established the boundary markers of circumcision, the Sabbath, and dietary restrictions, so why do the boundary markers bring knowledge of sin? On the other hand, if the works of the law have to do with keeping the Mosaic law perfectly, it makes sense that through the law comes knowledge of sin. For we already know from Romans 3:9 that all are under sin, which means that the law reveals to us a standard which we cannot maintain. Thus, the law reveals that we are sinful. Of course, as this counterargument agrees, Paul likely has the same concept of the law in mind in both Romans 3:20 and Romans 3:21. So Paul is likely saying that the righteousness of God is revealed apart from obeying the law perfectly.

Explanation:

Paul says that the righteousness of God is revealed apart from the law. He then explains that this righteousness of God is through faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 3:22), before stating in Romans 3:28 that we are justified by faith apart from the works of the law.⁷ It is important to notice that Paul’s language in Romans 3:28 mimics what he says in Romans 3:21. For in Romans 3:21, Paul writes that the righteousness of God is revealed apart from the law. Now in Romans 3:28 he says we are justified apart from the works of the law. Given that Paul uses the terms apart from and law in both Romans 3:21 and Romans 3:28 in conjunction with the notion of righteousness, we can see that Paul likely intends similar meanings in both instances.

Now, we know from Romans 2:13 that the doers of the law are righteous before God. We also know from Romans 3:9 that all are under sin, and from Romans 3:20 that no one will be justified by works of the law. Thus, when Paul refers to the works of the law in this section, he has in mind obeying the prescriptions of the Mosaic law. If one could obey the prescriptions, one would be righteous, but all are under sin, so no one can obey the prescriptions, so no one will be justified by the law. Now Paul says one is justified by faith apart from the works of the law, which is related to the fact that the righteousness of God is revealed apart from the law. So, Paul is saying that the righteousness of God is revealed apart from obeying the prescriptions of the Mosaic law.

Counterargument:

The problem here is that Paul does not say that one is justified apart from the law in Romans 3:20. Rather, he has in mind that God reveals his righteousness apart from the law. There is a difference between God revealing his righteousness, and humans being justified. Thus, there is a difference between God revealing his righteousness apart from the law, and humans being justified apart from the law. And this difference implies that we cannot use Paul’s meaning of the terms apart from and law from Romans 3:28 to inform his meaning of the same terms in Romans 3:21.

Response to counterargument:

The difference between God revealing his righteousness and humans being justified is not as far off as this counterargument wants us to believe. Rather, God revealing his righteousness could mean God revealing his prescription for how humans are justified. That is, God’s prescription for how humans are justified apart from the law is through faith in Jesus Christ.

Further, it is also possible to take it that Romans 3:21 and Romans 3:28 are in fact both referring to God’s saving righteousness.⁸ For Paul does not use an article in Romans 3:21 when he refers to righteousness, so he may have in mind not the righteousness of God, but a righteousness of God.⁹ And a righteousness of God could plausibly be taken as a saving righteousness. So Paul says in Romans 3:21 that a saving righteousness apart from the law has been revealed, which aligns with the notion that we are justified by faith, apart from the law.

One weakness of this view is that if we take Paul to be saying that the righteousness rather than a righteousness of God has been revealed, it is not exactly clear how faith in Christ reveals the righteousness of God. For when we think of God’s righteousness, we think of his holiness, and it is easy to see that the law reveals God’s holiness. On the other hand, it’s more difficult to see how the gospel reveals God’s holiness. Thus, we might take righteousness to include God’s mercy, justice, and grace, along with his holiness.

Explanation:

When Paul says that God’s righteousness is revealed apart from the law, it’s important to notice that he prefaces this with the phrase but now. The phrase carries a temporal notion, and Paul uses it to mark a shift in the eras of history. The old era is dominated by sin, while Paul is introducing the new era of salvation.¹³ In the era dominated by sin, God implemented the system of the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law has to do with how to live before God, along with covenantal markers such as circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, and dietary restrictions. Paul is saying that God’s righteousness is manifest in the new era apart from these national and religious covenantal markers.¹⁴

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that there are more ways to understand the new era of salvation history indicated by the phrase but now. That is, accepting that the phrase but now indicates the new salvation era does not commit us to the notion that apart from the law means apart from the national boundary markers of Judaism. Rather, Paul may just as well have in mind that in the old era the righteousness of God was prescribed by doing the law, while in the new era, the righteousness of God is prescribed by faith in Christ.

Explanation:

When Paul says that the righteousness of God is manifested apart from the law, he has the Mosaic law in mind. To understand what it means that the righteousness of God is manifested apart from the Mosaic law, we need to understand the theology of the Mosaic law.

The prophets and Jewish rabbis of Paul’s day understood the theology of the Mosaic law in the following way. In his love and mercy, God established a covenant with the Israelites. And the Israelites understood that in order to maintain membership in the covenant, they were to uphold the prescriptions of the covenant.¹⁵ In other words, through his love and mercy God established a covenant with Israel, and they were obliged to respond to this covenant by keeping the Mosaic law. Of course, the law involved not only maintaining the moral aspects of the law but also upholding circumcision, the Sabbath, and dietary restrictions.

Now Paul says in Romans 3:21 that the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law. In other words, the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the obligation to remain in the covenant by keeping the Mosaic law, including circumcision, the Sabbath, and dietary laws.

Counterargument:

While it is true that God established the covenant with Israel based on his grace and mercy, this is not the only aspect of the covenant. We can detect this because Paul himself says in Romans 2:13 that it is not the hearers but the doers of the law who will be justified before God. In other words, doing the law was not a simple obligation that demonstrated covenantal faithfulness to God. Rather, doing the law would make one righteous before God because the law outlines instructions for holy living. Of course, Paul also explains in Romans 3:9 that all are under sin, which implies that while doing the law would make one righteous before God, since all humans are under sin, no human will be righteous before God by doing the law. Hence, the good news that we can be righteous before God apart from the law through faith in Jesus Christ. So the theology of the law involves not only the fact that God is merciful for establishing a covenant with Israel, but also the fact that by doing the law, one does what is holy and is justified before God, although sin prevents anyone being justified by doing the law. Of course, this implies that when Paul says that the righteousness of God is manifested apart from the law, he has in mind that the righteousness of God is manifested apart from having to live up to the standard of the law.

The weakness of this view is that it does not consider how Paul uses the term law from Romans 2:13 to Romans 3:21. For Paul has already made clear that the law has to do with the prescriptions of the Mosaic law and the dictates of the conscience. So why would Paul suddenly use the term law to refer to the boundary markers of Judaism?