The Spirit Contra the Letter: Of Stone and Flesh

 

Romans 7 - Law of Sin and Death vs Law of Faith

In the last post we covered the difference between the shadow and the substance. The juxtaposition between the old and new covenants, which the author of Hebrews goes through great lengths to outline. Implicit in the arguments of the texts, is the supposition that there are distinct differences. 

But before I continue to address the next set of questions generated by the Hebrew Roots Bible machine, it’s important to establish that, so far, what can be distinctly concluded, is that there is, in fact, a difference. A difference in views, a difference in covenants, and a difference in forms, between these covenants and their practices. The bulk of these differences being carefully outlined from chapters 8-10.

The terminology used being that of the difference between the substance of a body, and the shadow. 

The contrast being so vivid, that the old is stated to be “obsolete and disappearing”. What is passing away? The covenant itself. The whole shebang. 

This creates a certain tension in the dispositions of those covenants, since BOTH claim the weight of eternity in each their throws. To the point of supposed mutual exclusion. 

This brings us to where the Hebrew Roots movement has gained a lot of momentum. It claims to offer a remedy to reconcile those differences with alleged “Biblical” cohesion that settles the debate. However, consequentially, once one manages to outline the model prepared, we notice a litany of inconsistencies that are really, on their face, entirely unsatisfactory, and superficial at best. However in order to uncover these inconsistencies requires a sort of granular focus on the whole arch of the body of text of scripture.

But that is really something that points to an even bigger problem, which is the spiritual poverty of the Christian church as a whole, as we have it today. With as many believers as there are in the works today Anna a powerful as the church is, it struggles to be the impending force for the Kingdom that it claims and attempts to be. This is largely caused by the thousands of years of history which goes in to the tradition, its development and preservation throughout the centuries. In the process of those centuries, believers have operated under a condition of clinging to particular pet doctrines, at the expense of reason, for the sake of the illusion of security. It’s comfortable to maintain some polemic that preserves a particular identity that offers an illusion of cohesion, when instead of allowing the text to speak for itself, the application of text and framework at play to engineer the text to make it say what prefers their particular assumption take precedent, which initiates a never ending juggling exercise of throwing up Bible verses, and wrestling with working out what the things actually say.

The biggest clue to this, is when you find yourself in a cycle of having to readdress the same topics in a never ending loop, where you’re having to recall the points that may have been previously addressed, but because the agenda at play is stronger than accepting the information as it really it, you find yourself instead in the futile exercise of dancing around the very simple truth that is outside the text. Namely, that the individual you find yourself engaged with is not concerned with allowing the information to affect them, in the way that it’s designed to do. Instead, the information becomes puffy in the hands of someone who’s established and preconceived notion for themselves about what they want things to say, because if it doesn’t, they have to admit some level of fault, and then their life and actions would have to change to conform to the facts as they are.

This, of course, is extremely difficult. Because you have family and friends and a world of relationships that you’ve built around you as a foundation for your way of life. To change that after a lifetime would be earth shattering. You’d find yourself on top of a pile of rubble praying for Gods help to reconstruct the pieces.

Unfortunately, that’s just the way the works is.

Such is the tip of the spear of this whole argument. That there really is a difference between the old and New Testament/covenant. Truly. Not in some exercise in novelties. Not as just some mere word games. That is what is confusing about the Hebrew Roots doctrines. That’s where they offer a very unstable leg, which is too weak to stand on. Namely: that while something about the old and new is difference, that difference is really inconsequential. Such that when the Hebrews author says, “obsolete and disappearing”, they don’t want to read the word about which the text hinges: the covenant. The OLD covenant.

Also, that where chapter 10 wants to spell out the shadow vs the body, the Hebrew Roots adherent will say, “yes, but those are the same.” The Law of the Old is the Law of the New. Even though a “change of law is necessary”, from a new priesthood. 

Such is this game of words being played, to supposedly and allegedly make such coherent sense, that when logically driven to their nexus point, such concepts are rendered absurd with regard as to why the suggestion would have ever been made in the first place. How would ever such a concept have arisen? What does a Greek speaking world have to gain from such an adjustment, if their only reward was to be fed to lions in the coliseum?

Apparently there’s enough of a difference that not only in Hebrews are these issues articulated, but elsewhere in Romans and Galatians.

Such tedium would be otherwise altogether unnecessary should the cohesion of the text be taken for what it is. But since it isn’t, it begs for a clear and sober recourse to remove all doubt, and provide a solid ground for others to stand on who maybe are intimidated by the sheer volume of material there is to pour through in order to weigh everything out. 

So we have to ask ourselves, is it worth it? Well, to me it is. Because we have the blessing of the True Kingdom of the New Heavens and the New Earth in the New Eden that is emerging on to the world.

So on to the next obstacle in this struggle for understanding. Continuing with my friend’s line of questioning:

The question: 

Does the law bring death? Did God establish His law to kill us?

Then answers with Romans 7:12-13., a passage that has a lot of depth of theological force to address this question, however it’s not the passage I have a problem with. It is the assertions sprinkled throughout that show how his mind is spinning the full breadth of the thorough guiding force of not just Romans, but other passages from other books as well. But this is the FIRST of MANY problem statements that arise through this line of reasoning:

“God's law sets our feet on the path of freedom and liberty. “

A novel concept. But not anything asserted in this text, nor any other in the whole of the New Testament. You will not find this sentence anywhere. You might be able to convince yourself that this is the spirit behind the words, as my friend as concluded. But the raw verbiage don’t exist anywhere within.

On the contrary, that same passage says that the law itself is something we’re to be set free from. The Law of Sin and death. What is that law of sin and death? And what was the initial question? “Does the law bring death?”

Well, the Book of Romans actually answers that a couple of chapters earlier, and then doubles down on that point in Roman’s 7:12-13

Romans 7:12-13 (NASB20) 12 So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. 13 Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? Far from it! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by bringing about my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.

In chapter 5 we get a bit of a setup for the mechanics of this:

Romans 5:12-13 (NASB20) 12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned-- 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not counted against anyone when there is no law.

So, here’s where we get in to the nitty gritty of the nuance of the train of thought of Paul as he’s outlining this notable difference between the Law of the Spirit and the law of sin and death.

So, what we see is that it’s SIN that is the cause of death. Not the Law itself. But is it the Law that leads to liberty? No. It says, instead, the Law was given “so that the offense would increase”. 

So with the increase of the law came the increases of the offense. 

“Romans 5:20-21 (NASB20) 20 The Law came in so that the offense would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, so also grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

So it’s the purpose of the Law not to set anyone free. In fact it says the Law is POWERLESS to do so. But the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus is what set us free. Here we can see a clear delineation. 

What is this delineation?

He outlines that more clearly a few chapters later:

“Romans 10:4-13 (NASB20) 4 For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 5 For Moses writes of the righteousness that is based on the Law, that the person who performs them will live by them. 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: “DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, ‘WHO WILL GO UP INTO HEAVEN?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).” 8 But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE PUT TO SHAME.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.”

Then Paul breaks down some things addressing the people of Israel in relationship to their purpose in God’s plan, after which he begins a sort of set of decrees himself, sprinkling other little notes about Law here and there, dealing with the treatment of others eating and drinking, arriving finally at this: 

“Romans 14:23 (NASB20) But the one who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.”

Here is where we find our concrete definition of what the problem is and where it lies. In this problem of faith. Where the law issues a set of questions about what you should or should not eat, outlined in sets of codes, Paul says the heart of the problem isn’t what you eat, it’s your faith, and that by faith, meat is meat, and good to eat.

So, while it will be the trope of many that it’s “disobedience to the law” that is sin, we see that is impossible, seeing as how sin entered the world, long before the law ever did. Why? Because of Faithlessness. It was Faithlessness in God’s promise “you shall surely die”, that Eve and Adam threw caution to the wind to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

But Paul ends the Romans commending the Gentile world for their obedience. We’re they obedient to the commands to rats kosher and get circumcised or keeping Shabbat? Obviously not. Otherwise our Hebrew Roots friends would have no reasons to shout and cry about the wicked Gentile world for not keeping kosher and the Shabbat, and not getting circumcised.

No, they became obedient to the “love of neighbors as yourself”. The Spiritual Law of Christ.

 But that’s just one book, and these issues have to be taken in tandem with the rest, through the parallels found in Hebrews and Galatians. 

So what we need to hang on to as we do that is that 

1. sin caused death, not the law

2. The law increased offense and was powerless to set anyone free

3. The Law of the Spirit (of God) is the END of the Law for righteousness.

4. Lack of faith is sin, not disobedience to the codes of law

Taking these conclusions, how does that compare back to Hebrews 7-11?

Well, let’s see... first we’ve got Perfection as the precedent for which the Law was given, but yet again, was powerless to deliver on.

We have a change of priesthood and as a result a change of law, which, it says:

“Hebrews 7:16 (NASB20) who has become a priest not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life.”

There, yet again, we see the Law is incapable of delivering any life. No freedom. No life. 

Hebrews 7:18-19 (NASB20) 18 For, on the one hand, there is the nullification of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness 19 (for the Law made nothing perfect); on the other hand, there is the introduction of a better hope, through which we come near to God.

So while we’ve got a better hope, the Law is not any hope at all. What’s the problem then? What’s the deal with the Law?

Hebrews 8:4-5 (NASB20) 4 Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; 5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “SEE,” He says, “THAT YOU MAKE all things BY THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN TO YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN.”

So we’ve got this filter. Moses. Whatever the promises there are, they’re filtered and diluted through this man, who was definitely a great man, and offered an important asset to human consciousness in history, yet was not completely competent to deliver what the end game that God had in mind when he initiated the Israel project.

They were left to deal with a shadow and a copy. Something that was destined to come to an end. Yet pointed to a promise of an eternal and abiding covenant. Which would have no end. 

Then we move on to a better covenant. Why is it better? Because it’s the covenant where the law is written directly on the hearts of men. Without the filter of Moses. See, there’s a logical incongruity with bringing the text of the Torah in to say “every word of the Torah, that is what is written on your heart”. Well, if that were the case, then that would not make it a shadow then, would it? The words themselves would be the substance. After all, weren’t the words of Moses adored and revered and honored by the most of the people of Israel before the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentacost?

Isn’t it true the gospel record of Luke gives the title of “righteous and blameless” to Zechariah and Elizabeth? 

And Mary herself favored?

They had the Torah didn’t they? What need was there for the Torah to be written on their hearts? How much more of the Law needed be written than already has been?

This answer is that while the Law may have been so written, it needn’t be the verbatim original manuscript Hebrew Texts of the Pentateuch. Or if it was, whatever text they had would have been many generations of texts removed from the originals. Or, we may even assume, the Septuagint text, which wasn’t penned until 1400 years after Moses. 

But Paul skirts all of that when he explains in II Corinthians 3, that the new covenant is not “off the letter, but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.”

He goes on:

“2 Corinthians 3:7-18 (NASB20) 7 But if the ministry of death, engraved in letters on stones, came with glory so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness excel in glory. 10 For indeed what had glory in this case has no glory, because of the glory that surpasses it. 11 For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory. 12 Therefore, having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, 13 and we are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not stare at the end of what was fading away. 14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. 15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their hearts; 16 but whenever someone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 But we all, with unveiled faces, looking as in a mirror at the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.”

So, we can see here that the Liberty comes not from reading the old covenant, but in lifting the veil to receive and behold Christ Himself, as in a mirror.

 And back in Romans 

“Romans 7:6 (NASB20)

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.”

This even becomes an issue with regard to who is or is not a Jew, according to Paul, who says, 

“Romans 2:27-29 (NASB20) 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a violator of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from people, but from God.”

If there’s anything that’s compellingly clear is that whatever Law is written on our hearts in that new covenant, it is not the LETTER of the Law. In fact, on the contrary, the Letter is that which is said to “kill” in a “ministry of death”.

We can go in to why, but one thing is clear, it’s that if your emphasis in the walk of following Yeshua resides on the meticulous adherence to cherry picked Torah passages, then what you’re adhering to is not the ministry of Life, but of death. It can’t be said to be or play any substantive role in the salvation, justification, or sanctification of the saint.

Its role is to serve one role: to increase offense. 

To teach the knowledge of sin:

Romans 3:20 (NASB20) because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin.

That’s how the letter of the Law of Moses is fortified. We can see that this phrase is the basic placeholder for everything having to do with the code of Laws set out by Moses, but not only that, but all other codes of laws that attempt to establish themselves as the very voice of God in our minds. By the Spirit, we’re able to interface with the voice and face of the Lord Jesus, rather than to find ourselves toiling over scriptures day in and day out.

But if we want to learn to do that, to interface with the Lord Jesus, we have to turn our gaze toward Him, as He truly is. Not as a set of codes and letters, but as the LOGOS made flesh. Who’s incarnated Himself in to the whole of creation. All in All.

“In the beginning was the LOGOS…”
“And the Lord said, ‘Let there be….”