SUBJECT:  Galatians 3:10

QUESTION:  Is there a contradiction here?  The verse seems to say we are under a curse for keeping the law and for not keeping the law. Please explain.

ANSWER:

Galatians 3:10

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

First notice this from our doctrine on the Law posted here: http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/churchdoctrines.php?stp=18

The book of Galatians is often used as support in an attempt to do away with God's law. This is not the issue dealt with in the epistle at all. The focal point of Paul's letter to the Galatians does not deal with the abrogation of the law but rather with the question of how one is justified. Justification means forgiveness for past sins—being counted as just and pure through Jesus' blood. That is what Paul is dealing with. In other words, there are two systems. One began with the covenant at Sinai. The other is the system of faith in Christ. The one system, of relying on the fact that you are circumcised, etc. for justification does not lead to eternal life. Paul shows that this only condemns—brings bondage—because no provision exists for real forgiveness and pardon for sin. So the system of the first covenant will not save anyone. Some were denying that to the Galatian Church. They were looking to their physical adherence to the way of life of the Sinaitic covenant, especially to circumcision, to earn them salvation.

But the question was not whether Gentiles could covet, or kill, or steal, or break the Sabbath. Rather, the question was whether a gentile had to be physically circumcised (Galatians 2:3-4). Paul categorically denied this. Galatians 2:14 portrays the problem further: the Jews were even practicing racial discrimination for religious reasons. They felt superior to their gentile brethren because they were physically a part of the heritage of Israel. But Paul showed in Romans that this should only have made them see their sins more, since they knew God's law so well. So the question has to do with circumcision and the manner or customs that one follows. Why, then, is Paul so upset over this? Because carried to their logical conclusion these requirements would mean that Jesus' death was not necessary. If being a Jew could save a man, if being physically circumcised could bring favor with God, then Christ died in vain. It would mean that just having the law would be enough. But having the law—having the whole system of the Sinaitic covenant-was not enough to attain eternal life; in fact, it only pointed out sin more and more. To rely fully on the law, one would have to keep all of it perfectly, which is impossible. So when Paul uses "law" in Galatians he means all that is involved in being a Jew—the whole system of the Sinaitic covenant, especially the ceremonies and rituals which were "added because of transgressions" until Christ should come (Galatians 3:19) —and he specifically singles out circumcision as an issue.

Justification must be by faith (Galatians 3:11) and the law of the Sinaitic covenant was given not to save us, but as a schoolmaster or "pedagogue," to teach us the meaning of obedience, to bring us to Christ.

This, then, is the core of Galatians. Much of Paul's reasoning is the same in Romans as in Galatians. But in Romans, Paul is dealing with moral law—sin and grace—whereas in Galatians, the problem is circumcision and understanding the place of the Sinaitic covenant, the whole. system called "law." But the same conclusions are arrived at by complementary arguments.

In Romans, Paul uses as an example the law of God concerning coveting (Romans 7:7ff). Why cannot that law save us? Because it only emphasizes the sin. If we rely on works of the law—our keeping of this law—we will fail. We are sinners and have all coveted. The only solution is justification by faith But after justification we must keep the law through God's Spirit. The law is holy, just and good; it is spiritual and eternal.

In Galatians, Paul deals with the law of circumcision. We cannot be saved by being circumcised, because if we go to that whole system of which circumcision is a part for salvation we receive no grace or pardon, only condemnation. We cannot, with our natural human strength, keep the law (i.e. the Ten Commandments; we can keep circumcision—it is painful, but easy). So the only solution is again Jesus and justification by faith. What about after justification? Are we then to follow circumcision and the system of the Sinaitic covenant? No, that would be to deny Jesus and our need for Him.

Once again, the reasoning in Romans and Galatians is basically the same, but the issues are different. The first is universal—the question of sin and morality. The second is the question of the historical place of the Sinai covenant in God's plan. Remember that the Ten Commandments did not originate with the Sinaitic covenant but with God at Creation and since. So they are not affected when the covenant is changed. They are universal and tell us what sin is.

Ephesians 6:1-3 is a very significant statement concerning the position of the Ten Commandments in the gentile churches. Here the fifth one is cited. Notice the comment in verse 2. It is "the first commandment with promise." Not just that it was—it still is. And what does Paul mean by "the first?" He is obviously referring to a set of commandments—a group of them. And they still apply. This simple statement by Paul gives us an important insight into the attitude of the gentile churches towards the Ten Commandments. He does not have to introduce them or say that "Honor your father and mother" was once a commandment with promise—for it is a commandment at this time.

If gentile Christians were indeed taught to honor and keep the Ten Commandments, why, then, does Paul make certain mitigating comments about "law?" The answer is rooted in the historical reality that Christianity at this time was viewed as a Jewish sect in the general public opinion. And therefore, much of what has been taken as a castigation of the Old Testament law in the New Testament is actually an antidote to the idea that gentiles had to become Jewish Proselytes before they could become Christians. This idea probably gained credence simply because gentile Christians were taught and read their Old Testament, and various proselytizing Jewish groups were spreading the message that gentiles had to follow the whole system of first-century Judaism in order to partake of the salvation offered by the God of Israel. Certainly to gentiles who had never heretofore been taught the Holy Scriptures, apostolic Christianity and contemporary Judaism must have seemed extremely similar (much as Methodism and Seventh-Day Adventism might seem similar to a Buddhist today). Paul therefore had to take great pains to show how Christianity differed from Judaism. He had to do this because the two religions clearly had so much in common.

Nearly everybody knew what Judaism and the Old Testament taught. The Sabbath and annual Holy Days, for example, were commonly known. What Paul had to do was not reemphasize the Old Testament laws already known, but rather teach the new revelations about Jesus Christ and His spiritual magnification of the law that nobody knew.

No attempt was made by the New Testament writers to repeat everything of relevance in the Old Testament. To have done so would have made the Old Testament redundant It would also have been utterly ridiculous, since the Old Testament was commonly presupposed to be inspired Scripture, the Word of God. It was the only Scripture then in existence.

Converts from paganism were, of course, tempted to revert to the religious culture from which they had come. They were influenced by various popular religions, syncretistic cults and astrological clans. But the contrast between Christianity and paganism was fairly clear. What was not so clear was the difference between Judaism and Christianity. Thus, even though Paul has to fight the influences of paganism and the contemporary culture, he seems to have found many problems from the Jewish side as well. In some cases, this problem may have been instigated by some sort of Jewish syncretistic group. (For example, a Jewish syncretistic astrological group may have been behind the problem in Colossaee. In other cases, it was probably the basic Hellenistic Jewish mission to the gentiles which upset the various churches.)

When this is understood, most of the presumed antinomian, anti-Jewish and anti-Old Testament sentiment in Paul's writings evaporates. Despite some differences of his specific mission to the gentiles, Paul suddenly looks a great deal like James and Peter and John in teaching what Jesus taught. Paul was no longer a Pharisee, but he remained a faithful Jew as well as becoming a Christian.

---end of excerpt---

Our doctrine explains it well and shows the difference between the “works of the Law” and continuing in the things of the Book of the Law---The Bible.  If all we do is keep the Old Covenant law, we miss the spiritual point of the Law and the whole New Testament Process of Salvation.

Now the Law is a chief element in the Salvation Process but that Law is seen in a way for which it was originally designed---to act as schoolmaster---to lead us to Godly principles which are made manifest by invoking the power of the Holy Spirit.  So, we study and keep the Law and invoke the Godly principles they point too.  Example:  We have laws that say not to steal and not to lie.  If fact, the Law points out our sins of stealing and lying.  These laws point to the Godly principle of Honesty and this is a Godly Work---Christ living in us---a continuing of the things in the book of the Law.

With repentance and baptism, we enter the Salvation Process and as long as we are in this process we are justified before God.  When we examine ourselves prior to taking the bread and wine, we are answering the one question, “Are we presently in the Salvation Process?”  If the answer is yes, then we are worthy to boldly take of the bread and wine.  If we remain in the Salvation Process till death or the return of Christ, we enter the Kingdom of God with eternal life.

There is no contradiction in Galatians 3:10.  It is talking about this:

“Justification must be by faith (Galatians 3:11) and the law of the Sinaitic covenant was given not to save us, but as a schoolmaster or "pedagogue," to teach us the meaning of obedience, to bring us to Christ.” –taken from the doctrine on the Law.  When we are in the Salvation Process, we are with Christ and in obedience to Him.  The word “faith” in Galatians 3:11 and throughout much of the New Testament when referring to being “in the faith” is talking about the Salvation Process.  We are justified by faith—being in the Salvation Process.

back to the top