Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 8
The speaker argues Romans is mainly about Jews, Gentiles, circumcision, and the law of Moses (Acts 15 background), not “gospel vs commandments”; how would early Christians in Rome—living close to the Jew/Gentile controversy—have heard Paul’s repeated use of the word “law,” and what modern assumptions does that correct?
Another way to ask: If Romans is mainly about Jews, Gentiles, circumcision, and the law of Moses, how would Christians in Rome have understood Paul’s repeated word “law”? What modern assumptions about “law” does that correct?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
He believes Roman Christians would hear “law” primarily as the Mosaic law tied to Jewish identity (circumcision and Moses’ customs), because that was the pressing controversy of their day. This corrects the modern assumption (associated with Luther in his telling) that Romans is mainly “gospel versus commandments” or “law is bad” in general.
- He says Romans’ focus is “Jews and Gentiles… Mosaic law… circumcision,” calling it “the whole background… historical context.”
- He points to Acts 15: “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved,” and Pharisee-believers: “necessary… to command them to keep the law of Moses.”
- Romans 2 example: “you are called a Jew and rest on the law”—he explicitly says this is “the law of Moses.”
- He critiques Luther’s framing: “Law, commandments versus gospel. No, it’s the gospel versus the law of Moses.”
- He insists Paul also speaks of another law (“law of the Spirit of life”), so “law… did not end with Christ Jesus,” meaning “law” can’t be flattened.